On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:36:09AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > In short, it seems really to me that we should reject the approach as > proposed, and replace it with something that prevents the fetching of > any WAL segments from the source server. I think that we could consider > as well removing all WAL segments on the primary from the point WAL > forked, as those created between the last checkpoint before WAL forked > up to the point where WAL forked are useful anyway. But those are bonus > points to keep a minimalistic amount of space for the rewound node as > they finish by being recycled anyway. For those reasons I think that the > patch should be marked as returned with feedback.
Hearing nothing and as the commit fest is coming to a close, I am marking this patch as returned with feedback. Feel free to correct me if you think this is not adapted. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
