Re: [HACKERS] Automatic cleanup of oldest WAL segments withpg_receivexlog - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Automatic cleanup of oldest WAL segments withpg_receivexlog
Date
Msg-id d531939a-75a0-a1d4-2941-2cf72e3f71e4@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Automatic cleanup of oldest WAL segments with pg_receivexlog  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Automatic cleanup of oldest WAL segments with pg_receivexlog  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2/23/17 10:10 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Wouldn't this one, along with some other scenarios, be better provided
> by the "run command at end of segment" function that we've talked about
> before? And then that external command could implement whatever aging
> logic would be appropriate for the environment?

That kind of API lead to difficulties with archiving direct from the 
database, so I'm not sure it's the best way to go.

ISTM what's really needed is a good way for users to handle retention 
for both WAL as well as base backups. A tool that did that would need to 
understand what WAL is required to safely restore a base backup. It 
should be possible for users to have a separate retention policy for 
just base backups as well as backups that support full PITR. You'd also 
need an easy way to deal with date ranges (so you can do things like 
"delete all backups more than 1 year old").

Perhaps a good starting point would be a tool that lets you list what 
base backups you have, what WAL those backups need, when the backups 
were taken, etc.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] A typo in mcxt.c
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY