From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Clough <greg@gclough.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Subject: Re: BUG #13770: Extending recovery_min_apply_delay on Standby causes it to be unavailable for a while
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:35:48 -0500
Message-ID: <11507.1451489748@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151230140218.5jqkq3rjoejlrgq7@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20151111155006.2644.84564@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
<CADjwvTMUR_hDHvrt0FneBK0y0DDUNTX09hREOkbO4exLLmB0Mw@mail.gmail.com>
<CADjwvTMqrqQhyyyrXwf1qHtJ6-U+TZJdGWjd3S5A3PQ3LxT34A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAB7nPqTYS51+ySZTUi32QVz0o1zcLDV_bO1BAtCON-7HeZwkMQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20151230140218.5jqkq3rjoejlrgq7@alap3.anarazel.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-bugs>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2015-12-26 22:45:57 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Depending on the use cases, it may be interesting to have a switch
>> allowing to not apply the delay should a consistent point not be
>> reached though...
> Is there actually any case where it's interesting to delay in that
> scenario? I mean that really can only happen if you changed the
> configuration to a different delay, or your clock offset
> changed. Otherwise we should always reach the consistent point before
> the delay plays a role. I'm tempted to simply only check for delay when
> consistent.
The argument for having a delay at all is to allow backing up to some
earlier point in the master's history; but a slave that is not yet
consistent cannot provide any rollback/recovery option. The slave is
completely useless for any purpose until it reaches consistency, so
it might as well do that as fast as possible, and then sit on the
next WAL record until the delay is met. +1 for no delay at all when
not consistent.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, michael.paquier@gmail.com, greg@gclough.com, simon@2ndQuadrant.com
Subject: Re: BUG #13770: Extending recovery_min_apply_delay on Standby causes it to be unavailable for a while
In-Reply-To: <11507.1451489748@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox