Re: Simplifying replication
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Simplifying replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4CC0E465.4000700@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Simplifying replication (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Simplifying replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>> Very true. But the lack of a -1 setting for wal_keep_segments means >> that if you would like to take a backup without archiving, you must >> set wal_keep_segments to a value greater than or equal to the rate at >> which you generate WAL segments multiplied by the time it takes you to >> run a backup. If that doesn't qualify as requiring arcane knowledge, >> I'm mystified as to what ever could. Speaking of which, what's the relationship between checkpoint_segments and wal_keep_segments? PG seems perfectly willing to let me set the latter higher than the former, and it's not documented. If checkpoint_segments were a hard limit, then we could let admins set wal_keep_segments to -1, knowing that they'd set checkpoint_segments to the max space they had available. Although we might want to rename those. -- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://www.pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: