From: | Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: .ready and .done files considered harmful |
Date: | 2021-05-06 19:23:36 |
Message-ID: | CAMT0RQR0Op5uSgunWpcTRjge5sjXL1nGY=xLG8PxFn4Smy4gcw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
How are you envisioning the shared-memory signaling should work in the
original sample case, where the archiver had been failing for half a
year ?
Or should we perhaps have a system table for ready-to-archive WAL
files to get around limitation sof file system to return just the
needed files with ORDER BY ... LIMIT as we already know how to make
lookups in database fast ?
Cheers
Hannu
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 12:24 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 3:23 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > FWIW It's already done for v14 individually.
> >
> > Author: Fujii Masao <fujii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> > Date: Mon Mar 15 13:13:14 2021 +0900
> >
> > Make archiver process an auxiliary process.
>
> Oh, I hadn't noticed. Thanks.
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-06 19:27:29 | Re: use `proc->pgxactoff` as the value of `index` in `ProcArrayRemove()` |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-06 19:22:02 | Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes |