Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dilip Kumar
Subject Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay
Date
Msg-id CAFiTN-vzbcSM_qZ+-mhS3OWecxupDCR5DkhQUTy+TKfrCMQLKQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay  (Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 1:01 AM Mahendra Singh Thalor
<mahi6run@gmail.com> wrote:

I was going through and patch and trying to understand the idea that
what we are trying to achieve here.  So basically, generally we start
the WAL receiver when we want to fetch the WAL, but if the user has
set the parameter WAL_RCV_START_AT_CONSISTENCY then we will start
fetching the WAL using walreciver in advance.  IMHO the benefit of
this idea is that with the GUC we can control whether the extra WAL
will be collected at the primary or at the standby node right?

One problem is that if the currentsource is XLOG_FROM_ARCHIVE then we
might fetch the WAL using both walreceiver as well as from archive
right? because we are not changing the currentsource.  Is this
intentional or do we want to change the currentsource as well?

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Japin Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Inconsistent error message for varchar(n)
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: make update-po problem with USE_PGXS