From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | CS DBA <cs_dba(at)consistentstate(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WAL Shipping and streaming replication |
Date: | 2015-09-28 14:54:54 |
Message-ID: | CAOR=d=14eCPYkthiDhc5vN5yNdifKG6PeyQnV0Nr33LdtNyG5A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:48 AM, CS DBA <cs_dba(at)consistentstate(dot)com> wrote:
> All;
>
> We have a 3 node replication setup:
>
> Master (node1) --> Cascading Replication Node (node2) --> Downstream
> Standby node (node3)
>
> We will be deploying WAL archiving from the master for PITR backups and
> we'll use the staged WAL files in the recovery.conf files in case the
> standbys need to revert to log shipping.
>
> Question: whats the best way to ensure consistency of WAL archiving in the
> case of changes (failover, etc)? can we setup the cascade node to archive
> wals only if it's the master? is this a case where we should deploy repmgr?
Look up WAL-E. It's works really well. We tried using OmniPITR and
it's buggy and doesn't seem to get fixed very quickly (if at all).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Keith Fiske | 2015-09-28 15:12:49 | Re: WAL Shipping and streaming replication |
Previous Message | CS DBA | 2015-09-28 14:48:59 | WAL Shipping and streaming replication |