On 11 January 2016 at 19:07, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:

> On 2016-01-11 20:03:18 +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > More generally, I'm doubtful that the approach of reading data from WAL
> > as proposed here is a very good idea. It seems better to "just" dump the
> > entire 2pc state into *one* file at checkpoint time.
> Or better: After determining the checkpoint redo location, insert a WAL
> record representing the entire 2PC state as of that moment. That way it
> can easily restored during WAL replay and nothing special has to be done
> on a standby. This way we'll need no extra wal flushes and fsyncs.

Feel free to submit a patch that does that.

Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Reply via email to