>> We don't want change checkpoint interval during recovery, that means
>> we cannot cnosider archive_timeout at the fist checkpointer after
>> recovery ends. So I think that the suggestion from Fujii-san is the
>> direction.
>+1
>If this idea has some problems, we can revisit Daisuke-san's idea.
On 2020/06/30 9:14, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
Opps! I misunderstood that.
At Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:00:25 +, "higuchi.dais...@fujitsu.com"
wrote in
Fujii-san, thank you for comments.
The cause of this problem is that the checkpointer's sleep time is calculated
>from both checkpoint_time
Opps! I misunderstood that.
At Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:00:25 +, "higuchi.dais...@fujitsu.com"
wrote in
> Fujii-san, thank you for comments.
>
> >The cause of this problem is that the checkpointer's sleep time is calculated
> >from both checkpoint_timeout and archive_timeout during normal runni
Fujii-san, thank you for comments.
>The cause of this problem is that the checkpointer's sleep time is calculated
>from both checkpoint_timeout and archive_timeout during normal running,
>but calculated only from checkpoint_timeout during recovery. So Daisuke-san's
>patch tries to change that so t
Thank you for comments.
>Unfortunately the diff command in your test script doesn't show me
>anything, but I can understand what you are thinking is a problem,
>maybe.
I'm sorry but I might have confused you... I explain how to use my test script.
I use diff command to check if the archiver has s
On 2020/06/29 16:41, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
Hello.
At Mon, 29 Jun 2020 04:35:11 +, "higuchi.dais...@fujitsu.com"
wrote in
Hi,
I found the bug about archive_timeout parameter.
There is the case archive_timeout parameter is ignored after recovery works.
...
[Problem]
When the value
At Mon, 29 Jun 2020 16:41:11 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> Anyway, the attached patch would resolve your problem.
I found another issue related to my last patch.
For the current master (and older versions) if walreceiver is signaled
to exit just after a segment is completed, walrec
Hello.
At Mon, 29 Jun 2020 04:35:11 +, "higuchi.dais...@fujitsu.com"
wrote in
> Hi,
>
> I found the bug about archive_timeout parameter.
> There is the case archive_timeout parameter is ignored after recovery works.
...
> [Problem]
> When the value of archive_timeout is smaller than that o
Hi,
I found the bug about archive_timeout parameter.
There is the case archive_timeout parameter is ignored after recovery works.
[Problem]
When the value of archive_timeout is smaller than that of checkpoint_timeout
and recovery works, archive_timeout is ignored in the first WAL archiving.
Once
