Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> If you aren't archiving then there's no guarantee that you'll still have
>> a continuous WAL series starting from the start of the backup.
> I wasn't really thinking of this use case, but you could set
> wal_keep_segments "high enough".
Ah. Okay, that seems like a workable approach, at least for people with
reasonably predictable WAL loads. We could certainly improve on it
later to make it more bulletproof, but it's usable now --- if we relax
the error checks.
(wal_keep_segments can be changed without restarting, right?)
> Not a configuration I would recommend
> for high availability, but should be fine for setting up a streaming
> replication standby for testing etc. If we don't allow
> pg_start/stop_backup() with archive_mode=off and max_wal_senders>0,
> there's no way to bootstrap a streaming replication standby without
> archiving.
Right. +1 for weakening the tests, then. Is there any use in looking
at wal_keep_segments as part of this test?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
