On 3/17/17 16:20, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 3/16/17 21:10, Robert Haas wrote: >> The changes to pg_standby seem to completely break the logic to wait >> until the file has attained the correct size. I don't know how to >> salvage that logic off-hand, but just breaking it isn't acceptable. > > I think we would have to extend restore_command with an additional > placeholder that communicates the segment size, and add a new pg_standby > option to accept that size somehow. And specifying the size would have > to be mandatory, for complete robustness. Urgh.
Another way would be to name the WAL files in a more self-describing way. For example, instead of 000000010000000000000001 000000010000000000000002 000000010000000000000003 name them (for 16 MB) 000000010000000001 000000010000000002 000000010000000003 Then, pg_standby and similar tools can compute the expected file size from the file name length: 16 ^ (24 - fnamelen) However, that way you can't actually support 64 MB segments. The next jump up would have to be 256 MB (unless you want to go to a base other than 16). -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
