On 23/1/19 5:26 π.μ., Jeremy Finzel wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 8:19 PM Achilleas Mantzios <ach...@matrix.gatewaynet.com
<mailto:ach...@matrix.gatewaynet.com>> wrote:
On 22/1/19 10:18 μ.μ., Jeremy Finzel wrote:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 2:16 PM Jeremy Finzel <finz...@gmail.com
<mailto:finz...@gmail.com>> wrote:
any one of those WAL files will not be archived and recycled as
long as it no longer needed by a replication slot
:(. s/no longer/still. I meant to say any one of those WAL files will not
be archived and recycled as long as it still needed by a replication slot.
A WAL segment will be archived as soon as it is completed.
|https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/continuous-archiving.html|
Yep, you’re right. Let me try this again. It will be archived, but the segment
won’t be reused or removed as long as the slot needs it. Is that an accurate
statement?
That's better :) Also it depends on the previous checkpoint.
Thanks,
Jeremy
||
||
--
Achilleas Mantzios
IT DEV Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
