Re: Warm-Standby using WAL archiving / Seperate pg_restorelog application

From: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: Postgresql-General <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Warm-Standby using WAL archiving / Seperate pg_restorelog application
Date: 2006-07-10 19:31:37
Message-ID: b42b73150607101231m2eff2cd6x4b346bb3a4af3465@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 7/10/06, Florian G. Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> wrote:
> This methods seems to work, but it is neither particularly fool-proof nor
> administrator friendly. It's not possible e.g. to reboot the slave without postgres
> abortint the recovery, and therefor processing all wals generated since the last
> backup all over again.
>
> Monitoring this system is hard too, since there is no easy way to detect errors
> while restoring a particular wal.

what I would really like to see is to have the postmaster start up in
a special read only mode where it could auto-restore wal files placed
there by an external process but not generate any of its own. This
would be a step towards a pitr based simple replication method.

merlin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2006-07-10 19:44:17 Re: Removing AddDepends; should I bother with a project?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-07-10 19:28:45 Re: Removing AddDepends; should I bother with a project?