Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Michael Paquier
Тема Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
Дата
Msg-id CAB7nPqTZkt97rgzzNTk=cD8dfou2-O8pR==ovLE5kcjB6PNBTQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, but isn't it better that we remove the snapshot taken
> at checkpoint time in the main branch or till where this code is
> getting back-patched.   Do you see any need of same after
> having the logging of snapshot in bgwriter?

But this one is necessary as well to allow hot standby faster to
initialize, no? Particularly in the case where a bgwriter snapshot
would have been taken just before the checkpoint, there may be up to
15s until the next one.

And AFAIK, this code would not get a back-patch, as stated by Andres
upthread :( I would think that it is better to actually get a
backpatch, but well...
-- 
Michael



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
Следующее
От: Aleksander Alekseev
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex