From: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Graeme B(dot) Bell" <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no> |
Cc: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: postgres hot-standby questions. |
Date: | 2015-03-26 16:18:06 |
Message-ID: | 06AC2E5A-2205-4CF5-82E6-9C35FBDDBF7F@elevated-dev.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Mar 26, 2015, at 10:08 AM, Graeme B. Bell <grb(at)skogoglandskap(dot)no> wrote:
>
> Assuming that you have your server configured with 1 or more hot standbys.
> Are there situations where it is smart & sane to allow a controlled (slow, not emergency) shutdown to complete asynchronously without knowing if any standby got the last bits of wal?
Sure.
Point updates. Shut down 9.4.0. Immediately re-start 9.4.1 on the same cluster.
OS security update, reboot server, PG shuts down and re-starts on boot.
Etc.
I don't care in those cases what the state of the network and my remote replicas are. The replication is interrupted briefly, and then resumes.
--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottribe/
(303) 722-0567 voice
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Ribe | 2015-03-26 16:19:39 | Re: postgres hot-standby questions. |
Previous Message | Gilberto Castillo | 2015-03-26 16:16:14 | Re: postgres hot-standby questions. |