I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. There's enough stuff there already
to deserve a new subdirectory, and if we add the capability for
streaming base backups etc. that has
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. There's enough stuff there already
to deserve a new subdirectory, and if we add the capability for
2010/1/15 Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. There's enough stuff there already
to deserve a new
Hi,
Heikki Linnakangas írta:
I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. [snip]
there's one loose end indeed.
make maintainer-clean doesn't delete these:
Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas írta:
I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. [snip]
there's one loose end indeed.
make maintainer-clean doesn't delete
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Also, I'm seeing a failure in buildfarm member 'colugos':
/opt/local/bin/ccache /Developer/usr/bin/llvm-gcc-4.2 -no-cpp-precomp
-I/opt/local/include -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
-Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing
-fwrapv
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Yep. What's happening is that make -j starts building libpq and
walreceiver.so simultaneously, because of the above line in the
Makefile. We actually have the same problem in src/bin/*/Makefile, but
we don't notice it there because
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Yep. What's happening is that make -j starts building libpq and
walreceiver.so simultaneously, because of the above line in the
Makefile. We actually have the same problem in src/bin/*/Makefile, but
we don't notice
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Yep. What's happening is that make -j starts building libpq and
walreceiver.so simultaneously, because of the above
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
I'm actually fairly uncomfortable with the notion that something buried
deep within the src/backend tree is going to reach over and cause libpq
to get built. Maybe the real answer is that you put walreceiver in the
Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
Yep. What's happening is that make -j starts building libpq and
walreceiver.so simultaneously,
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
I moved the line for src/backend/replication/walreceiver in src/Makefile
further down, after src/interfaces. That should fix the build failures
for now, but I'm all ears if there's better suggestions.
Yeah, I saw. Seems like a
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 05:36 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. There's enough stuff there already
to deserve
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
Uh, do we really want to call this replication rather than archive log
streaming or something. It seems replication is a generic term and
will confuse people who are using other replication solutions like
Slony.
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I've now committed streaming replication. I moved the files around a
bit, and put the walreceiver/walsender stuff in a new
src/backend/replication subdirectory. There's enough stuff there already
to deserve a new subdirectory, and if we add the
Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
Uh, do we really want to call this replication rather than archive log
streaming or something. It seems replication is a generic term and
will confuse people who are using other replication
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 19:30 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
Uh, do we really want to call this replication rather than archive log
streaming or something. It seems replication is a
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com
wrote:
Uh, do we really want to call this replication rather than archive log
streaming or something.
On Jan 15, 2010, at 9:37 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
But I'm still wondering why this isn't replication.
I was wondering the same thing. ISTM that the docs could reference third-party
replication solutions, too (or a wiki page listing them, since they'll change
often).
Anyway, I think Heikki's
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:11:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com writes:
I moved the line for src/backend/replication/walreceiver in
src/Makefile further down, after src/interfaces. That should fix
the build failures for now, but I'm all ears
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
+1, it is not replication. I would call it something like continuous
archiving or streaming pitr
I agree we should consider a different name.
But I'm still wondering why this isn't replication.
Because replication is an ambiguous and
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 19:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
File-based Log Shipping
Planning
Implementation
Streaming Replication
Setting up
How about Log Streaming Replication?
So its a particular kind of replication, which seems correct to me.
--
Simon Riggs
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 19:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
How about Log Streaming Replication?
So its a particular kind of replication, which seems correct to me.
I thought the whole point of this effort was to be
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 22:38 +, Greg Stark wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 19:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
How about Log Streaming Replication?
So its a particular kind of replication, which seems correct to
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 19:29 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
File-based Log Shipping
Planning
Implementation
Streaming Replication
Setting up
How about Log Streaming Replication?
So its a particular kind of replication, which seems
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Uh, do we really want to call this replication rather than archive log
streaming or something. It seems replication is a generic term and
will confuse people who are using other replication solutions like
Slony.
Good question. OTOH, if we move the sections
26 matches
Mail list logo
