On 2014-11-02 14:33:32 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > This will nead some persistent state about the commands success -
> > similar to the current archive status stuff. Given retries and
> > everything it might end up to be easier to have a separate process.
>
> That is mostly what I meant with my thid option, the "background
> process". But I guess we can do the actual queueing in the main
> process of course. But yeah, it comes down to if we wan tto deal with
> retries and such at all, or just leave that up to the external
> command. We could for example say that if you specify -a, we just stop
> doing the rename() in pg_receivexlog and *instead* do the archive
> command, making it that commands responsibility to move the file "from
> .partial". That might make things simpler.
I don't think that's good enough. Unless I miss something you really
can't reliably deal with pg_receivelog being stopped at arbitrary
moments that way. I also think that moving that much into the command
will nail down implementation details that we really don't want to
expose.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
