Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1yEZM7+cYvMgnk7owKtVEQqmYnYyx9PO6hKrYvfnPEbkg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Ответы Re: Hard limit on WAL space used (because PANIC sucks)  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:

>> The archive command can be made a shell script (or that matter a
>> compiled program) which can do anything it wants upon failure, including
>> emailing people.

You're talking about using external tools -- frequently hackish,
workaround ones -- to handle something which PostgreSQL should be doing
itself, and which only the database engine has full knowledge of.  

I think the database engine is about the last thing which would have full knowledge of the best way to contact the DBA, especially during events which by definition mean things are already going badly.  I certainly don't see having core code which knows how to talk to every PBX, SMS, email system, or twitter feed that anyone might wish to use for logging.   PostgreSQL already supports two formats of text logs, plus syslog and eventlog.  Is there some additional logging management tool that we could support which is widely used, doesn't require an expensive consultant to set-up and configure correctly (or even to decide what "correctly" means for the given situation), and which solves 80% of the problems?

It would be nice to have the ability to specify multiple log destinations with different log_min_messages for each one.  I'm sure syslog already must implement some kind of method for doing that, but I've been happy enough with the text logs that I've never bothered to look into it much.
 
While
that's the only solution we have for now, it's hardly a worthy design goal.

Right now, what we're telling users is "You can have continuous backup
with Postgres, but you'd better hire and expensive consultant to set it
up for you, or use this external tool of dubious provenance which
there's no packages for, or you might accidentally cause your database
to shut down in the middle of the night."

At which point most sensible users say "no thanks, I'll use something else".

What does the something else do?  Hopefully it is not "silently invalidate your backups".

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Joshua D. Drake"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bad error message on valuntil
Следующее
От: Cédric Villemain
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Proposed patch: remove hard-coded limit MAX_ALLOCATED_DESCS