Re: Recovery target 'immediate'
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Recovery target 'immediate' |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nM+XdncL9eC7rMFS+x4O3fcYkwpaVs978_-s2agw5cwx4Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Recovery target 'immediate' (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Recovery target 'immediate'
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 26 April 2013 17:25, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote: > On 26.04.2013 19:05, Simon Riggs wrote: >> >> On 26 April 2013 16:38, Robert Haas<robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Simon Riggs<simon@2ndquadrant.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Given that I was describing how we might implement Heikki's >>>> suggestion, I find this comment confusing. >>>> >>>> Please explain. >>> >>> >>> Heikki's suggestion is simply to have a mode that stops as soon as >>> consistency is reached. The server already knows (from the backup >>> label) what the consistency point is, so there's no need to add a >>> restore point or anything else to the WAL stream to implement what >>> he's talking about. >> >> >> Using restore points just puts into use the facility that is already >> best practice to use, put there for just this kind of situation. >> I guess you could do recovery_target_name = '$consistent' >> >> Doing it the other way means you need to add a new kind of recovery >> target to the API just for this. >> recovery_target_immediate = on > > > Sounds good to me. > > Actually, from a usability point of view I think would be nice to have just > one setting, "recovery_target". It's already somewhat confusing to have > recovery_target_xid, recovery_target_time, and recovery_target_name, which > are mutually exclusive, and recovery_target_inclusive which is just a > modifier for the others. Maybe something like: > > recovery_target = 'xid 1234' > recovery_target = 'xid 1234 exclusive' > recovery_target = '2013-04-22 12:33' > recovery_target = '2013-04-22 12:33 exclusive' > recovery_target = 'consistent' > recovery_target = 'name: daily backup' So now you want to change the whole existing API so it fits with your one new requirement? Sounds like flamebait to me, but -1, just in case you're serious. --Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: