On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 01:55:43PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 14 Sep 2021, at 16:05, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>> Do we actually need --target-restore-command at all? It seems to me
>>> that we have all we need with --restore-target-wal, and that's not
>>> really instinctive to pass down a
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 3:32 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> Doesn't apply once more: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3213.log
>
Thanks for the reminder, a rebased version is attached.
Regards
--
Alexey Kondratov
From df56b5c7b882e781fdc0b92e7a83331f0baab094 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: A
Hi,
On 2021-11-05 15:10:29 +0500, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> > 4 нояб. 2021 г., в 17:55, Daniel Gustafsson написал(а):
> >
> > The patch no longer applies, can you submit a rebased version please?
>
> Thanks, Daniel! PFA rebase.
Doesn't apply once more: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_37_3213.log
> 4 нояб. 2021 г., в 17:55, Daniel Gustafsson написал(а):
>
> The patch no longer applies, can you submit a rebased version please?
Thanks, Daniel! PFA rebase.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
v3-0001-Allow-providing-restore_command-as-a-command-line.patch
Description: Binary data
> On 14 Sep 2021, at 16:05, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>> Do we actually need --target-restore-command at all? It seems to me
>> that we have all we need with --restore-target-wal, and that's not
>> really instinctive to pass down a command via another command..
>
> Currently we know that --restore-t
> 14 сент. 2021 г., в 18:41, Daniel Gustafsson написал(а):
>
>>> Besides this patch looks good and is ready for committer IMV.
>
> A variant of this patch was originally objected against by Michael, and as
> this
> version is marked Ready for Committer I would like to hear his opinions on
>
>> Besides this patch looks good and is ready for committer IMV.
A variant of this patch was originally objected against by Michael, and as this
version is marked Ready for Committer I would like to hear his opinions on
whether the new evidence changes anything.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 10:05 AM Andrey Borodin wrote:
> There is a small bug
> + /*
> +* Take restore_command from the postgresql.conf only if it is not
> already
> +* provided as a command line option.
> +*/
> + if (!restore_wal && restore_command == NULL)
>
> 29 июня 2021 г., в 19:34, Alexey Kondratov
> написал(а):
>
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 10:06 PM Alexey Kondratov
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 5:42 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>>
>>> If we run 'pg_rewind --restore-target-wal' there must be restore_command in
>>> config of target insta
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 10:06 PM Alexey Kondratov
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 5:42 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
> >
> > If we run 'pg_rewind --restore-target-wal' there must be restore_command in
> > config of target installation. But if the config is not within
> > $PGDATA\postgresql.conf pg_
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 5:42 PM Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
> If we run 'pg_rewind --restore-target-wal' there must be restore_command in
> config of target installation. But if the config is not within
> $PGDATA\postgresql.conf pg_rewind cannot use it.
> If we run postmaster with `-c
> config
Hi hackers!
Starting from v13 pg_rewind can use restore_command if it lacks necessary WAL
segments. And this is awesome for HA clusters with many nodes! Thanks to
everyone who worked on the feature!
Here's some feedback on how to make things even better.
If we run 'pg_rewind --restore-target-w
12 matches
Mail list logo
