Message-ID: <53EBCCEA.3090604@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 16:39:06 -0400
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: MauMau <maumau307@gmail.com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>,
 Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Sample archive_command is still problematic
References: <53E5603B.5040102@agliodbs.com>
 <1407777686.41146.YahooMailNeo@web122306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <0F73426A2EA544878BCAC33BB989D671@maumau>
In-Reply-To: <0F73426A2EA544878BCAC33BB989D671@maumau>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

On 8/11/14 6:23 PM, MauMau wrote:
> I submitted a patch a patch for this a few months ago, which is pg_copy
> listed in the current CF.  The patch also addresses the problem that the
> archived file can get lost after power failure because it is not flushed
> to disk.    The patch consists of a program called pg_copy which can be
> used instead of cp/copy, and a doc fix to suggest using mv.  I made it
> following the favorable suggestions from people.

I realize that there are about 128 different ways people set this up
(which is itself a problem), but it appears to me that a solution like
pg_copy only provides local copying, which implies the use of something
like NFS.  Which may be OK, but then we'd need to get into the details
of how to set up NFS properly for this.

Also, I think you can get local copy+fsync with dd.

The alternatives of doing remote copying inside archive_command are also
questionable if you have multiple standbys.

Basically, this whole interface is terrible.  Maybe it's time to phase
it out and start looking into pg_receivexlog.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs