| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG: *FF WALs under 9.2 (WAS: .ready files appearing on slaves) |
| Date: | 2014-10-24 13:05:19 |
| Message-ID: | 544A4E8F.9050606@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/23/2014 11:09 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> At least for master, we should consider changing the way the archiving
> works so that we only archive WAL that was generated in the same server.
> I.e. we should never try to archive WAL files belonging to another timeline.
>
> I just remembered that we discussed a different problem related to this
> some time ago, at
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20131212.110002.204892575.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp.
> The conclusion of that was that at promotion, we should not archive the
> last, partial, segment from the old timeline.
So, this is what I came up with for master. Does anyone see a problem
with it?
- Heikki
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Don-t-try-to-archive-WAL-from-different-timelines.patch | text/x-diff | 15.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-10-24 13:05:46 | Re: Function array_agg(array) |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-10-24 13:02:21 | Re: Function array_agg(array) |