On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:07 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After thinking a bit on the subject, I have decided to submit a patch
> to do $subject. This makes pg_receivewal more consistent with
> pg_basebackup. This option is mainly useful for testing, something
> that becomes way more doable since support for --endpos has been
> added.
>
> Unsurprisingly, --synchronous and --no-sync are incompatible options.
+ <para>
+ By default, <command>pg_receivewal</command> flushes a WAL segment's
+ contents each time a feedback message is sent to the server depending
+ on the interval of time defined by
+ <literal>--status-interval</literal>.
IMHO, it's okay to remove the part 'depending on
the.....<literal>--status-interval</literal>'.
+ This option causes
+ <command>pg_receivewal</command> to not issue such flushes waiting,
Did you mean 'to not issue such flush waitings'?
+ [ 'pg_receivewal', '-D', $stream_dir, '--synchronous', '--no-sync' ],
+ 'failure if --synchronous specified without --no-sync');
s/without/with
--
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
