Re: pg_walinspect - a new extension to get raw WAL data and WAL stats

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com" <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com>, "marvin_liang(at)qq(dot)com" <marvin_liang(at)qq(dot)com>, "actyzhang(at)outlook(dot)com" <actyzhang(at)outlook(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg_walinspect - a new extension to get raw WAL data and WAL stats
Date: 2021-09-10 01:51:21
Message-ID: YTq6GZFTbyLPw1Jg@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:49:46PM +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
> +1

A backend approach has the advantage that you can use the proper locks
to make sure that a segment is not recycled or removed by a concurrent
checkpoint, so that would be reliable.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2021-09-10 02:03:05 Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements?
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2021-09-10 01:38:39 Re: corruption of WAL page header is never reported