Implementing pg_receivewal --no-sync
Hi all,
After thinking a bit on the subject, I have decided to submit a patch
to do $subject. This makes pg_receivewal more consistent with
pg_basebackup. This option is mainly useful for testing, something
that becomes way more doable since support for --endpos has been
added.
Unsurprisingly, --synchronous and --no-sync are incompatible options.
Thanks,
--
Michael
Attachments:
pg_receivewal_nosync.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=pg_receivewal_nosync.patchDownload+42-3
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:07 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
After thinking a bit on the subject, I have decided to submit a patch
to do $subject. This makes pg_receivewal more consistent with
pg_basebackup. This option is mainly useful for testing, something
that becomes way more doable since support for --endpos has been
added.Unsurprisingly, --synchronous and --no-sync are incompatible options.
+ <para>
+ By default, <command>pg_receivewal</command> flushes a WAL segment's
+ contents each time a feedback message is sent to the server depending
+ on the interval of time defined by
+ <literal>--status-interval</literal>.
IMHO, it's okay to remove the part 'depending on
the.....<literal>--status-interval</literal>'.+ This option causes
+ <command>pg_receivewal</command> to not issue such flushes waiting,
Did you mean 'to not issue such flush waitings'?+ [ 'pg_receivewal', '-D', $stream_dir, '--synchronous', '--no-sync' ],
+ 'failure if --synchronous specified without --no-sync');
s/without/with--
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:05 PM, Kuntal Ghosh
<kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com> wrote:
+ <para> + By default, <command>pg_receivewal</command> flushes a WAL segment's + contents each time a feedback message is sent to the server depending + on the interval of time defined by + <literal>--status-interval</literal>. IMHO, it's okay to remove the part 'depending on the.....<literal>--status-interval</literal>'.
This sentence is actually wrong, a feedback message is never sent with
the feedback message. You need to use either --synchronous or --slot
for that, and the docs are already clear on the matter.
+ This option causes + <command>pg_receivewal</command> to not issue such flushes waiting, Did you mean 'to not issue such flush waitings'?
By reading again the patch, "waiting" should not be here. I have
reworded the documentation completely anyway. Hopefully it is more
simple now.
+ [ 'pg_receivewal', '-D', $stream_dir, '--synchronous', '--no-sync' ], + 'failure if --synchronous specified without --no-sync'); s/without/with
Right.
--
Michael
Attachments:
pg_receivewal_nosync_v2.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=pg_receivewal_nosync_v2.patchDownload+38-3
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
This sentence is actually wrong, a feedback message is never sent with
the feedback message.
Eh?
I think this looks basically fine, though I'd omit the short option
for it. There are only so many letters in the alphabet, so let's not
use them up for developer-convenience options.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:This sentence is actually wrong, a feedback message is never sent with
the feedback message.Eh?
"A feedback message is never sent depending on the status interval".
I think this looks basically fine, though I'd omit the short option
for it. There are only so many letters in the alphabet, so let's not
use them up for developer-convenience options.
No objections to that.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:03 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:This sentence is actually wrong, a feedback message is never sent with
the feedback message.Eh?
"A feedback message is never sent depending on the status interval".
I think this looks basically fine, though I'd omit the short option
for it. There are only so many letters in the alphabet, so let's not
use them up for developer-convenience options.No objections to that.
Okay. Here is an updated patch incorporating those comments.
--
Michael
Attachments:
pg_receivewal_nosync_v3.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=pg_receivewal_nosync_v3.patchDownload+36-2
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 3:42 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
Okay. Here is an updated patch incorporating those comments.
Committed with a little wordsmithing on the documentation.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 12:31 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 3:42 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:Okay. Here is an updated patch incorporating those comments.
Committed with a little wordsmithing on the documentation.
Thanks all.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers