Re: archive modules - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: archive modules
Date
Msg-id YYDLd7vsmrYHC+9C@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: archive modules  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>)
Responses Re: archive modules
Re: archive modules
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 01:43:54PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On 2021/11/02 3:54, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> This thread is a continuation of the thread with the subject
>> "parallelizing the archiver" [0].  That thread had morphed into an
>> effort to allow creating archive modules, so I've created a new one to
>> ensure that this topic has the proper visibility.
>
> What is the main motivation of this patch? I was thinking that
> it's for parallelizing WAL archiving. But as far as I read
> the patch very briefly, WAL file name is still passed to
> the archive callback function one by one.

It seems to me that this patch is not moving into the right direction
implementation-wise (I have read the arguments about
backward-compatibility that led to the introduction of archive_library
and its shell mode), for what looks like a duplicate of
shared_preload_libraries but for an extra code path dedicated to the
archiver, where we could just have a hook instead?  We have been
talking for some time now to make the archiver process more
bgworker-ish, so as we finish with something closer to what the
logical replication launcher is.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Added schema level support for publication.
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side