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