Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work
Дата
Msg-id 20180813155545.t3xafhk52wbambmv@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Ответы Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Hi,

On 2018-08-13 11:42:47 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > This should really work even without replication slots though.
> > 
> > Why? I fail to see what'd be gained by adding "always retain one
> > segment" rule. It'd not make the setup any more reliable. If anything
> > it'd make it harder to spot issues in test setups.
> 
> What exactly is wrong with the setup where this should be failing?

If you want to rely on archiving, you either need to be ok with
arbitrary delays in low activity periods, or use archive timeout.

If you want to rely on streaming, you need an appropriate WAL retention
policy, i.e. wal_keep_segments or replication slots.


The setup at hand does doesn't want arbitrary delay in archiving
situations but doesn't use archive_timeout and it retain the necessary
WAL for streaming.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work
Следующее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #15323: wal_keep_segments must be >= 1 for WAL archiving +streaming to work