"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 5:47 PM, in message <695.1193438855@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> And after
>> each archive_timeout, we test to see if we need to flush the current WAL
>> segment out to the archive; which is determined by whether the write
>> pointer is currently exactly at the start of a segment or not.
> Hmmm... We would actually prefer to get the WAL file at the
> specified interval.
Well, if it's a feature not a bug, that's fine with me. I wonder though
how predictable the behavior will really be with 8.3's distributed
checkpoints ... you might need to find another way anyhow.
regards, tom lane
