Horton

Re: remove more archiving overhead

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-07-07T22:07:16Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 05:06:13PM -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On 7/7/22 14:22, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 10:51:42AM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> > +    library to ensure that it indeed does not overwrite an existing file.  When
>> > +    a pre-existing file is encountered, the archive library may return
>> > +    <literal>true</literal> if the WAL file has identical contents to the
>> > +    pre-existing archive.  Alternatively, the archive library can return
>> 
>> This should likely say something about ensuring the pre-existing file is
>> persisted to disk before returning true.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Also, I'd prefer to remove "indeed" from this sentence (yes, I see that was
> in the original text):
> 
> +    library to ensure that it indeed does not overwrite an existing

Here's an updated patch.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Commits

  1. Be more prescriptive in new doc about re-archiving of same WAL file.

  2. doc: Add note about re-archiving of same WAL files in docs.

  3. Reduce overhead of renaming archive status files.