From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: master in standby mode croaks |
Date: | 2010-04-14 11:07:34 |
Message-ID: | x2j603c8f071004140407t172c082cwe9e68720a4d3fd00@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 09:02 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> So this can fail in either of two ways
>
> If I understand this correctly, it is unconvincing as a failure mode
> since it doesn't follow any of the documented procedures for creating a
> standby. There are many ways to screw up that ignore the manual, which
> is why the manual exists.
>
> If you can show a full test case, with failure, then I'll follow it
> through.
Huh? If I had done everything correctly, of course I wouldn't have
gotten an error message at all. Surely the point is that if I do
something wrong, I should get an error message that describes what I
actually did wrong rather than an error message telling me that I did
something wrong which I clearly did not do.
The recent patch to allow starting from a shutdown checkpoint means
that a standby can be created by shutting down the master and taking a
filesystem-level snapshot of the cluster directly, creating
recovery.conf, and firing it up again. Anyone who does that with the
default postgresql.conf, though, is going to get a message telling
them that they need to change a setting which is already set
correctly.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-04-14 11:10:02 | Re: BUG #5412: test case produced, possible race condition. |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-04-14 10:29:27 | Re: Hot Standby: Startup at shutdown checkpoint |