Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> writes:
> > I am not sure about rsync, in my production server I have for example
> > 111 GB in pg_xlog and if I run rsync for pg_xlog it must send ~ 40GB
> > of new WALs I think.
> >
>
> Isn't the difference between old and new is just the last WAL segment
> file? What is the source of this difference?
Postgres generate WAL files forward, and at standby too :-(
For example:
=== master ===
$ psql -c 'select pg_current_xlog_insert_location()'
pg_current_xlog_insert_location
---------------------------------
4ED09/34A74590
(1 row)
$ ls 9.2/main/pg_xlog/ | awk '/4ED0900000034/,/xxx/ { print }' | wc -l
2262
==============
=== standby ===
$ psql -c 'select pg_last_xlog_replay_location()'
pg_last_xlog_replay_location
------------------------------
4ED0A/AECFD7B8
(1 row)
postgres@avi-sql29:~$ ls 9.2/main/pg_xlog/ | awk '/4ED0A000000AE/,/xxx/ { print
}' | wc -l
2456
===============
See https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/wal-configuration.html
> they are recycled (renamed to become the next segments in the numbered
> sequence)
--
Sergey Burladyan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
