Re: replication slots replicated to standbys? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Craig Ringer
Subject Re: replication slots replicated to standbys?
Date
Msg-id CAMsr+YHqqjYrf_SGzoOYrF0ivz-7xyk=X7Hmut5J-hUMgXY-jA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: replication slots replicated to standbys?  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On 22 August 2016 at 10:31, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Craig Ringer
<craig.ringer@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 21 Aug 2016 12:36 AM, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> Seems like another good idea to use pg_basebackup rather than manually
>> doing base backups;  Magnus has been saying this for a while.
>
> The main time that's an issue is when you're rsync'ing to save bandwidth,
> using CoW volume snapshots, etc. pg_basebackup becomes totally impractical
> on big systems.

Yes, and that's not fun. Particularly when the backup takes so long
that WAL has already been recycled... Replication slots help here but
the partitions dedicated to pg_xlog have their limit as well.

We can and probably should allow XLogReader to invoke restore_command to fetch WAL, read it, and discard/recycle it again. This would greatly alleviate the pain of indefinite xlog retention.

It's a pain to do so while recovery.conf is its own separate magic though, not part of postgresql.conf.
 
I have no plans to work on this at this time.

-- 
 Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Logical decoding of sequence advances, part II
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?