Re: Return of the pg_wal issue.. - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Adrian Klaver
Subject Re: Return of the pg_wal issue..
Date
Msg-id f1ad892c-43fb-4c4b-96f3-01f71ae4f4bf@aklaver.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Return of the pg_wal issue..  (Saul Perdomo <saul.perdomo@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Return of the pg_wal issue..
List pgsql-general
On 1/23/25 06:51, Saul Perdomo wrote:

> This is why everybody will tell you "don't just delete these files, 
> archive them properly!" Again, for operational purposes, you could just 
> delete them. But you really want to make a /copy /of them before you 
> do... you know, /just in case /something bad happens to your DB that 
> makes you want to roll it back in time.

No you can't just delete them for operational purposes without knowledge 
of whether they are still needed or not.

Per:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/wal-intro.html

and

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/wal-configuration.html

Short version, a WAL file must remain until a checkpoint is done that 
makes it's content no longer needed.

> Cheers
> Saul
> 

-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com




pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Paul Brindusa
Date:
Subject: Re: Return of the pg_wal issue..
Next
From: Adrian Klaver
Date:
Subject: Re: Records count mismatch with logical replication