Re: Standbys which don't synch to disk?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Standbys which don't synch to disk?
Date: 2011-05-11 18:48:18
Message-ID: 4DCAD9F2.4030905@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert,

> > That WAL has effectively disappeared from the
> > master, but is still present on the slave. Now the master comes up
> > and starts processing read-write transactions again, and generates a
> > new and different 1kB of WAL. Hilarity ensues, because the two
> > machines are now out of step with each other.

Yeah, you'd need some kind of instant failover and STONITH. That is,
any interruption on the master would be a failover situation. While
that seems conceivable for crashes, consider that a planned restart of
the master might be an issue, and an OOM-kill would certainly be.

> > You could possibly fix this by making provision for the master to
> > connect to the slave on start-up and stream WAL "backwards" from slave
> > to master. That'd be pretty spiffy.

Ouch, now you're making my head hurt.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2011-05-11 18:48:33 Re: Unfriendly handling of pg_hba SSL options with SSL off
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-05-11 18:33:57 Re: pg_upgrade and PGPORT