Re: Streaming Replication: Checkpoint_segment and wal_keep_segments on standby
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Streaming Replication: Checkpoint_segment and wal_keep_segments on standby |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 13184.1275318865@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Streaming Replication: Checkpoint_segment and wal_keep_segments on standby (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Streaming Replication: Checkpoint_segment and wal_keep_segments
on standby
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> The central question is whether checkpoint_segments should trigger
> restartpoints or not. When PITR and restartpoints were introduced, the
> answer was "no", on the grounds that when you're doing recovery you're
> presumably replaying the logs much faster than they were generated, and
> you don't want to slow down the recovery by checkpointing too often.
> Now that we have bgwriter active during recovery, and streaming
> replication which retains the streamed WALs so that we now risk running
> out of disk space with long checkpoint_timeout, it's time to reconsider
> that.
> I think we have three options:
What about
(4) pay some attention to the actual elapsed time since the last
restart point?
All the others seem like kluges that are relying on hard-wired rules
that are hoped to achieve something like a time-based checkpoint.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: