I do not want to create new files. As far as I know, now we copy segments
to archive dir before they get checkpointed. What I suggest is to copy them
to a temp dir under wal directory and then move to archive. In my
understanding at the time we copy the files to a temp folder all changes to
them are already fsynced.
2018-02-13 21:29 GMT+03:00 Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com>:
> I see the only one problem with your suggestion - number of
> "uncheckpointed" segments is potentially unlimited.
> Right now we have limited number (10) of file segments with immutable
> names in WAL "work" directory. We have to keep this approach due to known
> bug in XFS - fsync time is nearly twice bigger for recently created files.
> Best Regards,
> Ivan Rakov
> On 13.02.2018 21:22, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
>> I meant we still will be copying segment once and then will be moving it
>> archive which should not affect file system much.
>> 2018-02-13 21:19 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org>:
>>> I remember we had some confusing behavior for WAL archive when archived
>>> segments were required for successful recovery.
>>> Is issue still present?
>>> If yes, what if we copy "uncheckpointed" segments to a directory under
>>> directory and then move the segments to archive after checkpoint? Will