Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-10 Thread Amit kapila
On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 7:15 PM Amit Kapila wrote: On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 5:49 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-09 15:06:04 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:28 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2013-01-09 14:04:32 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-09 Thread Amit Kapila
On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 5:49 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-09 15:06:04 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:28 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2013-01-09 14:04:32 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:57 PM Andres Freund wrote: > >

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-09 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-01-09 15:06:04 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:28 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2013-01-09 14:04:32 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:57 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > On 2013-01-08 20:33:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > On T

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-09 Thread Amit Kapila
On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:28 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-09 14:04:32 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:57 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2013-01-08 20:33:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:01 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-09 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-01-09 14:04:32 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:57 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2013-01-08 20:33:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:01 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > On 2013-01-08 19:51:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > On Mon

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-09 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:57 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-08 20:33:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:01 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2013-01-08 19:51:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Monday, January 07, 2013 7:15 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > >

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-08 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-01-08 20:33:28 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:01 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2013-01-08 19:51:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > On Monday, January 07, 2013 7:15 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > > On 2013-01-07 19:03:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > On Mond

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-08 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tuesday, January 08, 2013 8:01 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-08 19:51:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Monday, January 07, 2013 7:15 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2013-01-07 19:03:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > On Monday, January 07, 2013 6:30 PM Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > > O

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-08 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-01-08 19:51:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Monday, January 07, 2013 7:15 PM Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2013-01-07 19:03:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > On Monday, January 07, 2013 6:30 PM Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > On 7 January 2013 12:39, Amit Kapila > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > So

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-08 Thread Amit Kapila
On Monday, January 07, 2013 7:15 PM Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-01-07 19:03:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > On Monday, January 07, 2013 6:30 PM Simon Riggs wrote: > > > On 7 January 2013 12:39, Amit Kapila > wrote: > > > > > > > So We can modify to change this in function LogStandbySnapshot as

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-07 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-01-07 19:03:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > On Monday, January 07, 2013 6:30 PM Simon Riggs wrote: > > On 7 January 2013 12:39, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > > > So We can modify to change this in function LogStandbySnapshot as > > below: > > > running = GetRunningTransactionData

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-07 Thread Simon Riggs
On 7 January 2013 13:33, Amit Kapila wrote: >> If we skip the WAL record in the way you suggest, we'd be unable to >> start quickly in some cases. > > If there are any operations happened which have generated WAL, then on next > checkpoint interval the checkpoint operation should happen. > Which

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-07 Thread Amit Kapila
On Monday, January 07, 2013 6:30 PM Simon Riggs wrote: > On 7 January 2013 12:39, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > So We can modify to change this in function LogStandbySnapshot as > below: > > running = GetRunningTransactionData(); > > if (running->xcnt > 0) > >

Re: [HACKERS] Extra XLOG in Checkpoint for StandbySnapshot

2013-01-07 Thread Simon Riggs
On 7 January 2013 12:39, Amit Kapila wrote: > So We can modify to change this in function LogStandbySnapshot as below: > running = GetRunningTransactionData(); > if (running->xcnt > 0) > LogCurrentRunningXacts(running); > > So this check wil