Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yl1jC-00016k-S3 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 20:58:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yl1jC-0001wT-6P for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 20:58:38 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yl1jB-0001wJ-33 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 20:58:37 +0000 Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Yl1j7-00033q-Bh for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 20:58:36 +0000 Received: by qkx62 with SMTP id 62so235511537qkx.0 for ; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 13:58:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ixH9mRafJ0s35Q7V9zMDa4/opbELB9JFChlx1hhCdcg=; b=AVYUsVuHAKc9d/Uh6WRItu94RniCG0qoN96wiFWHqEGYKPAUdcQPQ4U4xWuvB8OcPQ BS1R4nQ8QJbCKQZbzGTcVH13eMkJgB7xOsuf7FaIl/UvRvtgrGA+0X60P7EpSwbnaWWO +48QsX0Ta1yrCO+/GTBhqlLGQYsahNXURyBdIMCd4+rAAegWyeHixDhlj0nw6Bgx1o8U dd3pZF+a1avG+d0RZ3ERDnvxaVUJOMpCO2WR/IZHfADtoFkJBnJzEnCJbEB7A13gjuGW i+A666A1t5P/bi1tnyFXMJPCMkl6NbX7mGkZKpXDXB8VMgM6sTJUB8MKboLfEv7LET+B DRfg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.108.74 with SMTP id i68mr30310080qgf.73.1429736311561; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 13:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.250.139 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 13:58:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5537F7AD.1060604@iki.fi> References: <548AF1CB.80702@vmware.com> <689EB259-44C2-4820-B901-4F6B1C55A1E4@simply.name> <549083D6.1000301@vmware.com> <54949108.3030109@vmware.com> <552FA38F.9060005@iki.fi> <5535FE71.1010905@iki.fi> <55362CAD.2000207@iki.fi> <55373D17.5050706@iki.fi> <5537EFEF.6060808@iki.fi> <5537F7AD.1060604@iki.fi> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 16:58:31 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Streaming replication and WAL archive interactions From: Robert Haas To: hlinnaka Cc: Michael Paquier , Venkata Balaji N , Andres Freund , Fujii Masao , Borodin Vladimir , PostgreSQL-development Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 04/22/2015 10:21 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >> 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? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers