Horton

Re: base backup client as auxiliary backend process

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-07-11T14:36:43Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 4:05 PM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> My idea is that the postmaster can launch a base backup worker, wait
>> till it's done, then proceed with the rest of the startup.  initdb gets
>> a special option to create a "minimal" data directory with only a few
>> files, directories, and the usual configuration files.

> Why do we even have to do that much?  Can we remove the need for an
> initdb altogether?

Gotta have config files in place already, no?

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Factor out InitControlFile() from BootStrapXLOG()

  2. Reformat code comment

  3. pg_resetwal: Rename function to avoid potential conflict

  4. Expose PQbackendPID() through walreceiver API

  5. walreceiver uses a temporary replication slot by default

  6. Make lsn argument of walrcv_create_slot() optional

  7. More precise errors from initial pg_control check