Re: Backup throttling
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Backup throttling |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52130EC2.3000500@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Backup throttling (Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: Backup throttling
Re: Backup throttling |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 19.08.2013 21:15, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > 2013-08-19 19:20 keltezéssel, Andres Freund írta: >> Based on a quick look it seems like you're throttling on the receiving >> side. Is that a good idea? Especially over longer latency links, TCP >> buffering will reduce the effect on the sender side considerably. > > Throttling on the sender side requires extending the syntax of > BASE_BACKUP and maybe START_REPLICATION so both can be > throttled but throttling is still initiated by the receiver side. Throttling in the client seems much better to me. TCP is designed to handle a slow client. > Maybe throttling the walsender is not a good idea, it can lead > to DoS via disk space shortage. If a client can initiate a backup and/or streaming replication, he can already do much more damage than a DoS via out of disk space. And a nothing stops even a non-privileged user from causing an out of disk space situation anyway. IOW that's a non-issue. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: