Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
We leave that up to the DBA to clean out one way or another. We
provide restartpoint_command and the %r option in restore_command to
help with that.
I was in fact just looking into this, and I see that there is no example
restartpoint_comand script given in th
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of jue jun 03 08:36:28 -0400 2010:
>
> > Using this only temporarily is mentioned in the doc patch. Do I need
> > more?
>
> Yeah, it's far too easy to miss. Besides, I think the wording you used
> is ambiguous -- it can be read as "t
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of jue jun 03 08:36:28 -0400 2010:
> Using this only temporarily is mentioned in the doc patch. Do I need
> more?
Yeah, it's far too easy to miss. Besides, I think the wording you used
is ambiguous -- it can be read as "the server will temporarily keep all
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Surely we don't expect DBAs to delete old files in pg_xlog? I agree with
>> Simon here, I think it would be better to not provide -1 as an option
>> here. At least you better document well that you should only do that
>> temporarily or you wi
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 03/06/10 15:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> I think its much easier to find out your free disk space than it is to
> >> calculate how much WAL might be generated during backup. Disk space
> >> doesn't vary significantly on a production database.
>
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 03/06/10 15:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> I think its much easier to find out your free disk space than it is to
> >> calculate how much WAL might be generated during backup. Disk space
> >> doesn't vary significantly on a production database.
>
On 03/06/10 15:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
I think its much easier to find out your free disk space than it is to
calculate how much WAL might be generated during backup. Disk space
doesn't vary significantly on a production database.
If we encourage that laziness then we will g
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 20:28 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > > The attached patch allows wal_keep_segments = -1 to keep all segements;
> > > > this is particularly useful for taking a
On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 20:28 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > The attached patch allows wal_keep_segments = -1 to keep all segements;
> > > this is particularly useful for taking a base backup, where you need all
Robert Haas wrote:
> > The attached patch allows wal_keep_segments = -1 to keep all segements;
> > this is particularly useful for taking a base backup, where you need all
> > the WAL files during startup of the standby. ?I have documented this
> > usage in the patch as well.
> >
> > I am thinking
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > The attached patch allows wal_keep_segments = -1 to keep all segements;
> > this is particularly useful for taking a base backup, where you need all
> > the WAL files during startup of the standby. I have document
On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 15:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The attached patch allows wal_keep_segments = -1 to keep all segements;
> this is particularly useful for taking a base backup, where you need all
> the WAL files during startup of the standby. I have documented this
> usage in the patch
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>> > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > > Bruce Momjian writes:
>> > >> Uh, did we decide that 'wal_keep_segments' was the best name for this
>> > >> GUC setting? ?I know we shipp
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > >> Uh, did we decide that 'wal_keep_segments' was the best name for this
> > >> GUC setting? ?I know we shipped beta1 using that name.
> > >
> > > I thought min_wal_segme
14 matches
Mail list logo
