Re: XLog changes for 9.3
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: XLog changes for 9.3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMKN9yiL8P4O8QanbCiE-LpHWA8wan6uciq9QwYCu2=c7g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: XLog changes for 9.3 (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: XLog changes for 9.3
Re: XLog changes for 9.3 Re: XLog changes for 9.3 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 7 June 2012 17:12, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 07.06.2012 18:51, Simon Riggs wrote: >> >> On 7 June 2012 14:50, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> >>> These changes will help the XLogInsert scaling patch >> >> >> ...and as I'm sure you're aware will junk much of the replication code >> and almost certainly set back the other work that we have brewing for >> 9.3. So this is a very large curve ball you're throwing there. > > > I don't think this has much impact on what you're doing (although it's a bit > hard to tell without more details). The way WAL records work is the same, > it's just the code that lays them out on a page, and reads back from a page, > that's changed. And that's fairly isolated in xlog.c. I wasn't worried about the code overlap, but the subsidiary breakage looks pretty enormous to me. Anything changing filenames will break every HA config anybody has anywhere. So you can pretty much kiss goodbye to the idea of pg_upgrade. For me, this one thing alone is sufficient to force next release to be 10.0. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: