| From: | hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Raghavendra <raghavendra(dot)rao(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL - General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: How can you get "WAL segment has already been removed" when doing synchronous replication ?! |
| Date: | 2013-07-12 11:05:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20130712110536.GA471@depesz.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:30:22PM +0530, Amit Langote wrote:
> >> Increasing the wal_keep_segments ?
> > I know that I can increase wal_keep_segments to "solve" it, but
> > shouldn't it be *impossible* to happen with synchronous replication?
> > After all - all commits should wait for slave to be 100% up to date!
> Is it possible that xlog recycling might have caused this wherein the
> xlog segment which is yet to be archived/shipped is recycled? I
As far as I know, pg will not recycle log before it's archived.
Otherwise we wouldn't be able to have archives.
> remember something of that sort. Check this discussion:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/51779B3B.1020003@lab.ntt.co.jp
> Is this logged on the master or a standby?
master.
Best regards,
depesz
--
The best thing about modern society is how easy it is to avoid contact with it.
http://depesz.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vincenzo Romano | 2013-07-12 11:23:40 | |
| Previous Message | Raghavendra | 2013-07-12 10:18:38 | Re: function returning select result to JDBC |