Re: base backup client as auxiliary backend process

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-07-11T14:23:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



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