Re: little PITR annoyance
decibel <decibel@decibel.org>
From: Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>,
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: <ohp@pyrenet.fr>,
"pgsql-hackers list" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2007-06-14T01:47:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
How about adding to the general TODO in case someone finds time before Simon? On Jun 10, 2007, at 5:55 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 20:48 +0200, ohp@pyrenet.fr wrote: >>> >>>> My questions was: why don't we start the archiving *BEFORE* >>>> postmaster to >>>> make room. >>> >>> The archiver is executed from the postmaster, so thats not possible. >>> >> I'm aware of that, my point is maybe the archiver doesn't need >> postmaster >> to be fully operational (responding to db requests) to be started >>> We could investigate where best to put some code, but it wouldn't be >>> executed very frequently. >> I agree, OTOH, the more PITR is used on big busy db to more this may >> happend. >>> >>> Why not just execute the archive_command in a script, replacing >>> the .ready with .done files in archive_status directory when its >>> processed? >>> >> Sure, but if *I* can do it, why can't the system? >> >> What do you think, > > Just looked at the code. Does seem possible to start archiver > earlier - > it has no hooks into anything else and doesn't need transactions. > > Starting archiver earlier would not be the only change required, since > recovery could be very short. That will take some thought on how to > resolve. > > I have other things pressing on me now, but I'll add this to my todo, > though I'll be relying on you to test it when I get round to it. -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)