From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
Cc: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: speed up a logical replica setup |
Date: | 2023-11-09 23:12:07 |
Message-ID: | ZU1nR5KMZtSTEQDf@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 03:41:53PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 08.11.23 00:12, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> - Should the subdirectory pg_basebackup be renamed into something more
>> generic at this point? All these things are frontend tools that deal
>> in some way with the replication protocol to do their work. Say
>> a replication_tools?
>
> Seems like unnecessary churn. Nobody has complained about any of the other
> tools in there.
Not sure. We rename things across releases in the tree from time to
time, and here that's straight-forward.
>> - And if it would be better to refactor some of the code generic to
>> all these streaming tools to fe_utils. What makes streamutil.h a bit
>> less pluggable are all its extern variables to control the connection,
>> but perhaps that can be an advantage, as well, in some cases.
>
> Does anyone outside of pg_basebackup + existing friends + new friend need
> that? Seems like extra complications.
Actually, yes, I've used these utility routines in some past work, and
having the wrapper routines able to run the replication commands in
fe_utils would have been nicer than having to link to a source tree.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-11-09 23:12:50 | Re: pg_upgrade failing for 200+ million Large Objects |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2023-11-09 22:51:42 | pgsql: doc: fix wording describing the checkpoint_flush_after GUC |