From: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: The behavior of CheckRequiredParameterValues() |
Date: | 2014-03-05 03:07:30 |
Message-ID: | CA+HiwqEb3CMHPc+u8tQvYD8uBsqU55vN4G6FUhag38XcKwYomA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> xlog.c:6177
> if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY)
> ereport(ERROR,
> (errmsg("hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not
>
> So we have to start and stop standby server with changed
> wal_level(i.g., hot_standby) if we want to enable hot standby.
> In this case, I think that the standby server didn't need to confirm
> wal_level value of ControlFile.
> I think that it should confirm value which is written in postgreql.conf.
>
I think checking it from the control file on a standby in recovery
means that we should confirm if the *wal_level with which the WAL was
generated* is sufficient to now become a hot standby after recovery
finishes.
--
Amit
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2014-03-05 05:55:11 | API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner? |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2014-03-05 03:02:23 | Re: Row-security on updatable s.b. views |