Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTinUrN_XO5dRqIaIKfEaMZPGd9IrwYwXz3-qVdvm@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 17:56 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> > I don't understand why you want to use a different delay when you're >> > restoring from archive vs. when you're streaming (what about existing WAL >> > files found in pg_xlog, BTW?). The source of WAL shouldn't make a >> > difference. >> >> Yes. The pace of a recovery has nothing to do with that of log shipping. >> So to hurry up a recovery when restoring from archive seems to be useless. > > When streaming drops for some reason we revert to scanning the archive > for files. There is clearly two modes of operation. Yes. > So it makes sense > that you might want to set different times for the parameter in each > case. What purpose would that serve? Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: