Greg Smith <gsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Now, it would be possible to have that less sensitive archive code path zero > things out, but you'd need to introduce a way to note when it's been done (so > you don't do it for a segment twice) and a way to turn it off so everybody > doesn't go through that overhead (which probably means another GUC). That's a > bit much trouble to go through just for a feature with a fairly limited > use-case that can easily live outside of the engine altogether. Wouldn't it be just as good to indicate to the archive command the amount of real data in the wal file and have it only bother copying up to that point? -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support! -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
