Re: pg_start_backup and pg_stop_backup Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make CheckRequiredParameterValues() depend upon correct
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-04-28T18:21:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> If you aren't archiving then there's no guarantee that you'll still have >> a continuous WAL series starting from the start of the backup. > I wasn't really thinking of this use case, but you could set > wal_keep_segments "high enough". Ah. Okay, that seems like a workable approach, at least for people with reasonably predictable WAL loads. We could certainly improve on it later to make it more bulletproof, but it's usable now --- if we relax the error checks. (wal_keep_segments can be changed without restarting, right?) > Not a configuration I would recommend > for high availability, but should be fine for setting up a streaming > replication standby for testing etc. If we don't allow > pg_start/stop_backup() with archive_mode=off and max_wal_senders>0, > there's no way to bootstrap a streaming replication standby without > archiving. Right. +1 for weakening the tests, then. Is there any use in looking at wal_keep_segments as part of this test? regards, tom lane