| From: | Ben Chobot <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Streaming replication failover |
| Date: | 2011-12-31 21:02:38 |
| Message-ID: | 0386D5E0-0380-4CEB-9D62-6C0F321EC003@silentmedia.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
I'm in the process of setting up a 9.1-based SR cluster, and I've got a question on how failover is expected to work in the case of multiple slaves. http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/warm-standby-failover.html says:
"Some people choose to use a third server to provide backup for the new primary until the new standby server is recreated, though clearly this complicates the system configuration and operational processes."
I think a third server sounds like a swell idea, but I'm unclear how a slave based on the old master can act as a slave for the new master. I thought that once the master switched, you'd get a new wal timeline, and any existing slaves won't follow along with the new timeline. Which is really unfortunate, because it means the only way to have a slave, immediately after a failover, is to build one ASAP and hope you don't have insurmountable problems while that's going on. For a big database, that can take a while.
Hopefully I'm missing something?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2011-12-31 23:38:32 | Re: Streaming replication failover |
| Previous Message | gato pardo | 2011-12-31 14:20:55 | Re: pgoledb transaction error |