Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 3:08 AM, German Becker > wrote: > > Thanks Amit, I understand now. Is there a way to know/predict how many > > prealocated segments will there be in a certain moment? What does it > deppend > &

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
Thanks Amit, I understand now. Is there a way to know/predict how many prealocated segments will there be in a certain moment? What does it deppend on? On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Amit Langote wrote: > > I didn't quite understand what you mean by that... But anyways so do you > > people th

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > > Maybe I didn't explain correctly. I am using COPY/pg_dump/pg_restore for > > migration (and it is working fine). The streaming replication is for > > hot-standby replication *once migrated*. Thing is I disbable archving and > > set wal_leve

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-24 Thread German Becker
a, to make it faster. Then I switch to wal_level=hot_standby, i.e the "production" configuration, and the WAL segment seuqence seems to overlap with the segments generated with the other setting. On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:18

Re: [HACKERS] WAL segments (names) not in a sequence

2013-05-23 Thread German Becker
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Amit Langote > wrote: > > Okay, now I understand. Also, looking at his "ls -l pg_xlog", I could > > find that modified timestamps of all those pre-allocated segments are > > about similar (around 12:10), w