Re: [proposal] recovery_target "latest" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [proposal] recovery_target "latest"
Date
Msg-id bbaa0a24-2103-8e93-5f9c-7edfb44b01fe@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [proposal] recovery_target "latest"  (Grigory Smolkin <g.smolkin@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: [proposal] recovery_target "latest"  (Grigory Smolkin <g.smolkin@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-11-08 05:00, Grigory Smolkin wrote:
> Attached new patch revision, now end of available WAL is defined as the
> fact of missing required WAL.
> In case of standby, the end of WAL is defined as 2 consecutive switches
> of WAL source, that didn`t provided requested record.
> In case of streaming standby, each switch of WAL source is forced after
> 3 failed attempts to get new data from walreceiver.
> 
> All constants are taken off the top of my head and serves as proof of
> concept.

Well, this is now changing the meaning of the patch quite a bit.  I'm on 
board with making the existing default behavior explicit.  (This is 
similar to how we added recovery_target_timeline = 'current' in PG12.) 
Still not a fan of the name yet, but that's trivial.

If, however, you want to change the default behavior or introduce a new 
behavior, as you are suggesting here, that should be a separate discussion.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions
Next
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?