| From: | "t(dot)dalpozzo(at)gmail(dot)com" <t(dot)dalpozzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: streaming replication and WAL |
| Date: | 2016-10-25 16:23:07 |
| Message-ID: | 580F86EB.2000202@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Sure you're right... my oversight, sorry. I wanted only to create a
situation in which the standby remains quite behind with updates, so we
can suppose that there is a list of standby servers (so the primary
keeps going on with the 2nd) or simply suppose the replication async.
Pupillo
Il 25/10/2016 18:17, Francisco Olarte ha scritto:
> I may be confused but...
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:08 PM, t(dot)dalpozzo(at)gmail(dot)com
> <t(dot)dalpozzo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> These servers are configured for Sync streaming replication .
>> Let's suppose that the standby stays down for a long time, then it restarts,
> Doesn't sync replication plus standby down mean primary will stop
> accepting work?
>
> Francisco Olarte.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Caldeweyher | 2016-10-25 20:39:20 | Re: Errors while installing PostGIS by an unusual method |
| Previous Message | Francisco Olarte | 2016-10-25 16:17:01 | Re: streaming replication and WAL |