public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Venkata Balaji N <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Fujii Masao <[email protected]>
Cc: Borodin Vladimir <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and WAL archive interactions
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 11:11:19 +0300
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmobeqTeka4M1=5Cm9zJR6ybD1bTUoLCPESzayz86VEiNDw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAHGQGwGJzp-QS7BODiv1uc291gAKtjzzCPb_nzUTxYKJhLsUCA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAEyp7J9Hy8Q__FbGeR5skjk7d0dvLC+KLXB3JUuWrXXdJ5O+Wg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAB7nPqQE179yogtg+nKvdwt9KROxTyt-EjumKOMbuXQtea5r3w@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAB7nPqS=V=LF-JZsv9eGF84joQ3jxugt4gkOK6kD1CiB98_vWg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZhcbyDBr8UdGu=y5kmnVcSwcnaBqqV=UnP+oCGiNQGeQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+Tgmoa_Fwi+q4EKu+SYszowBN5k5LYDY4VkFOtmzkez2PdYLg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoY5MJ5sDxToQZ28Jku8BFQ5T8=LMSduCZB-0zKThOx_WQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmobeqTeka4M1=5Cm9zJR6ybD1bTUoLCPESzayz86VEiNDw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 04/22/2015 11:58 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 04/22/2015 10:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> For example, imagine that perform point-in-time recovery to WAL position
>>>> 0/1237E568, on timeline 1. That falls within segment
>>>> 000000010000000000000012. Then we end recovery, and switch to timeline 2.
>>>> After the switch, and some more WAL-logged actions, we'll have these
>>>> files
>>>> in pg_xlog:
>>>>
>>>> 000000010000000000000011
>>>> 000000010000000000000012
>>>> 000000020000000000000012
>>>> 000000020000000000000013
>>>> 000000020000000000000014
>>>
>>>
>>> Is the 000000010000000000000012 file a "partial" segment of the sort
>>> you're proposing to no longer achive?
>>
>> If you did pure archive recovery, with no streaming replication involved,
>> then no. If it was created by streaming replication, and the replication had
>> not filled the whole segment yet, then yes, it would be a partial segment.
>
> Why the difference?
Because we don't archive partial segments, except for the last one at a
timeline switch, and there was no timeline switch to timeline 1 within
that segment.
It doesn't really matter, though. The behaviour at the switch from
timeline 1 to 2 works the same, whether the 000000010000000000000012
segment is complete or not.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
view thread (31+ messages) latest in thread
reply
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and WAL archive interactions
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox