| From: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_system_identifier() |
| Date: | 2013-08-23 16:23:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HMJc+7OCDUFYD=ChWSp6jxBRPContr3Y2Y3py5swwaxig@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
This doesn't generate a unique id. You could back up a standby and restore
it and point it at the original master and end up with two standbies with
the same id.
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>wrote:
> On 08/22/2013 06:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > A
> > Do we have a reliable way of generating a unique identifier for each
> slave
> > (independently of how that might be exposed)?
> Probably we could just generate an unique UUID when we first detect
> that we are replicating from the master with same UUID.
>
> This of course requires this master UUID to be present in some way
> in the replication stream
>
> Cheers
>
> --
> Hannu Krosing
> PostgreSQL Consultant
> Performance, Scalability and High Availability
> 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2013-08-23 16:30:03 | Re: pg_system_identifier() |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2013-08-23 15:08:05 | Re: pg_system_identifier() |