From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dylan Luong <Dylan(dot)Luong(at)unisa(dot)edu(dot)au>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_rewind - restore new slave failed to startup during recovery |
Date: | 2017-08-22 14:39:13 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEx1kLkXmBKHTNawy5S-iLZFrv11fv1=7inwX7L80UOQUw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 3:06 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Dylan Luong <Dylan(dot)Luong(at)unisa(dot)edu(dot)au>
> wrote:
> > 1. Disable the master ltm member (all connections redired to slave
> > member)
> > 2. Promote slave (touch promote.me)
> > 3. Stop the master db (old master)
> > 4. Do pg_rewind on the new slave (old master)
> > 5. Start the new slave.
>
> That flow looks correct to me. No I think that you should trigger
> manually a checkpoint after step 2 on the promoted standby so as its
> control file gets forcibly updated correctly with its new timeline
> number. This is a small but critical point people usually miss. The
> documentation of pg_rewind does not mention this point when using a
> live source server, and many people have fallen into this trap up to
> now... We should really mention that in the docs. What do others
> think?
>
If the documentation is missing such a clearly critical step, then I would
say that's a definite documentation bug and it needs to be fixed. We can't
really fault people for missing a small detail if we didn't document the
small detail...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-22 15:39:45 | Re: Porting libpq to QNX 4.25 |
Previous Message | Melvin Davidson | 2017-08-22 14:20:31 | Re: Deadlocks |