| From: | Alan Hodgson <ahodgson(at)simkin(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 9.0 replication -- multiple hot_standby servers |
| Date: | 2010-10-29 19:03:57 |
| Message-ID: | 201010291203.57756@hal.medialogik.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On October 29, 2010, "Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)"
<postgresql(at)ultimeth(dot)com> wrote:
> On 2010-10-29 11:17, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> > I'm curious about this too. It seems that currently I'd have to
> > rebuild any additional slaves basically from scratch to use the new
> > master.
>
> I think so long as you "pointed" (via primary_conninfo) the additional
> slaves to the new (pending) master, before you "touch"ed the pending
> master's trigger file, you should be OK, as all the DBs should be in
> sync at that point.
Yeah they're in sync data-wise, but do they think they're the same WAL
stream for continuity? Would be nice.
--
A hybrid Escalade is missing the point much in the same way that having a
diet soda with your extra large pepperoni pizza is missing the point.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rob Richardson | 2010-10-29 20:52:02 | Unhandled exception in PGAdmin when opening 16-million-record table |
| Previous Message | Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) | 2010-10-29 18:45:14 | Re: 9.0 replication -- multiple hot_standby servers |