Bruce Momjian
Simon Riggs wrote:
User-selectable behaviour? OK. That's how we deal with fsync; I can
relate to that. That hadn't been part of my thinking because of the
importance I'd attached to the log files themselves, but I can go
with
that, if that's what was meant.

So, if we had a parameter called Wal_archive_policy that has 3
settings:
None = no archiving
Optimistic = archive, but if for some reason log space runs out then
make space by dropping the oldest archive logs
Strict = if log space runs out, stop further write transactions from
committing, by whatever means, even if this takes down dbms.

That way, we've got something akin to transaction isolation level
with
various levels of protection.
Yep, we will definately need something like that. Basically whenever
the logs are being archived, you have to stop the database if you can't
archive, no?
That certainly was my initial feeling, though I believe it is possible
to accommodate both viewpoints. I would not want to have only the
alternative viewpoint, I must confess.

Best Regards, Simon Riggs

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase