Re: archiving question

Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.db.postgresql.general
Message-ID <CABUevEztLX=vhe=PY3qFAThmumAjraf9zDoVXLAtRrCyf9yxLw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 10:50 AM Zwettler Markus (OIZ) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
> > Gesendet: Freitag, 6. Dezember 2019 02:43
> > An: Zwettler Markus (OIZ) <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Stephen Frost <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]
> > Betreff: Re: archiving question
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 03:04:55PM +0000, Zwettler Markus (OIZ) wrote:
> > > What do you mean hear?
> > >
> > > Afaik, Postgres runs the archive_command per log, means log by log by
> log.
> > >
> > > How should we parallelize this?
> >
> > You can, in theory, skip the archiving for a couple of segments and then
> do the
> > operation at once without the need to patch Postgres.
> > --
> > Michael
>
>
> Sorry, I am still confused.
>
> Do you mean I should move (mv * /backup_dir) the whole pg_xlog directory
> away and move it back (mv /backup_dir/* /pg_xlog) in case of recovery?
>
>
No, *absolutely* not.

What you can do is have archive_command copy things one by one to a local
directory (still sequentially), and then you can have a separate process
that sends these to the archive -- and *this* process can be parallelized.

//Magnus
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.