Re: Cascading replication and recovery_target_timeline='latest'

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
To: hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Cascading replication and recovery_target_timeline='latest'
Date: 2012-09-05 14:55:28
Message-ID: m2mx14tt7j.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
> I was worried about that too at first, but Fujii pointed out that's OK: see
> last paragraph at
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-08/msg01203.php.

Mmm, ok.

I'm worried about master-standby-standby setup where the master
disappear, we promote a standby and the second standby now feeds from
the newly promoted standby. Well we have to reconnect manually in this
case, but don't we need some similar stopgaps?

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gianni Ciolli 2012-09-05 14:59:13 Re: State of the on-disk bitmap index
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-09-05 14:28:37 Re: 9.2rc1 produces incorrect results