Re: WAL file internals and why a 64 bit will not work on a 32 bit
От | Dhaval Shah |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WAL file internals and why a 64 bit will not work on a 32 bit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 565237760705101711h1abb667dme48afb879edfdfeb@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WAL file internals and why a 64 bit will not work on a 32 bit (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WAL file internals and why a 64 bit will not work on a 32 bit
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Thanks. If I partition my disk differently between the primary and standby will that be a problem? Regards Dhaval On 5/10/07, Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> wrote: > Dhaval Shah wrote: > > I do know that WAL files taken from a 64 bit OS will not work on a 32 > > bit OS. However I have to prepare a technical answer to this. > > > > That is, questions like - why a WAL file from 64 bit will not work in > > 32 bit. Also does the WAL file differ for same architecture but > > different kind of partitions? > > The WAL files track on-disk changes. That is, they represent the bytes > changed in individual blocks. So - both machines will need to have > *identical* on-disk formats for the WAL transfer to work. > > It can be something as small as a configuration option chosen when > compiling PostgreSQL. For example - you can change between > floating-point and integer date-times at ./configure time and if you use > different settings on two identical machines then the WAL files will be > incompatible. > > The obvious incompatibility I'd expect in a 32 to 64-bit changeover > would be alignment of data fields to 32 or 64-bit boundaries. I've not > checked, but I'd be surprised if there wasn't some difference there. > > -- > Richard Huxton > Archonet Ltd > -- Dhaval Shah
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: