Re: allowing wal_level change at run time
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: allowing wal_level change at run time |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevExh+1kgi6eO2VMa=e_08_Z-n=i_rE8aovsnVU9n1zpEcw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: allowing wal_level change at run time (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: allowing wal_level change at run time
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
On 2015-08-19 10:49:46 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> What happens "the first time"? Meaning I'm on wal_level=minimal and take a
> base backup. Then when the replica first connects 10 minutes later, it
> needs WAL back in time, which was logged at wal_level=minimal.
> So you'd need to bump it up whenever a base backup is done -- but then you
> can't drop it back down again or your base backup will be useless.
> Or am I missing something?
Nope. Requiring pg_basebackup to automatically create such a
'non-reserving' slot doesn't seem to be too bad to me.
That's doable - but what about manual base backups? And if they don't go away, what about the ones that are generated by the nightly/weekly/hourly/whatever "pg_basebackup -x" ones?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: