Re: Replication failure, slave requesting old segments

From: "Phil Endecott" <spam_from_pgsql_lists(at)chezphil(dot)org>
To: <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: "Adrian Klaver" <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Replication failure, slave requesting old segments
Date: 2018-08-13 14:17:14
Message-ID: 1534169834014@dmwebmail.dmwebmail.chezphil.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Adrian Klaver wrote:
> "If you set up a WAL archive that's accessible from the standby, these
> solutions are not required, since the standby can always use the archive
> to catch up provided it retains enough segments. *This is dependent on
> verification that the archiving is working properly. A belt and
> suspenders approach would be to set wal_keep_segments to a value > 0 in
> the event archiving is not properly functioning*"
> "

Adrian, I believe that the suggestion that my issue was the result of
my archiving process not working is not correct.

The quote above does not address the requirement for wal_keep_segments
to be >= 1 even when archiving is functioning correctly.

I will continue to monitor this thread in the hope that others will
confirm my understanding, but otherwise I will bow out now (and file a
bug).

Thanks to all.

Phil.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashu Pachauri 2018-08-13 14:24:26 Fwd: is there any adverse effect on DB if I set autovacuum scale factor to zero?
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2018-08-13 14:11:54 Re: Replication failure, slave requesting old segments