Re: Backup throttling

From: Antonin Houska <antonin(dot)houska(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Backup throttling
Date: 2013-09-03 21:12:40
Message-ID: 522650C8.9090805@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 09/03/2013 06:56 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

>> + /*
>> + * Only the following suffixes are allowed. It's not too useful to
>> + * restrict the rate to gigabytes: such a rate will probably bring
>> + * significant impact on the master anyway, so the throttling
>> + * won't help much.
>> + */
>> + case 'g':
>> + factor <<= 10;
>
> I don't understand why you allow a 'g' here, given the comment above ...
> but in any case it should be G.
>

This reflects my hesitation whether GB should be accepted as a unit or
not. I'll probably remove this suffix.

(Will fix the other findings too,)

Thanks,
Tony

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2013-09-03 21:25:01 Re: WAL CPU overhead/optimization (was Master-slave visibility order)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2013-09-03 19:56:15 Re: logical changeset generation v5