Re: [HACKERS] Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctlstart without --wait

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctlstart without --wait
Дата
Msg-id add8e55c-21fc-2af6-06e2-a64441c602bc@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctlstart without --wait  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctlstart without --wait  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 1/18/17 3:12 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I don't understand what I'm missing when it comes to checkpoint_timeout
> and the time required to recover from a crash.  You aren't the first
> person to question that association, but it seems pretty clear to me.
> 
> When doing recovery, we have to replay everything since the last
> checkpoint.  If we are checkpointing at least every 5 minutes then we
> can't have any more than 5 minutes worth of WAL to replay, right?

But writing WAL and replaying WAL are two entirely different operations.Writing a WAL record involves writing a few
bytessequentially.
 
Replaying a WAL record might involve hopping all over the system and
applying the changes that the WAL record describes.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Generate fmgr prototypes automatically
Следующее
От: Vladimir Gordiychuk
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [JDBC] SEGFAULT in HEAD with replication