Derrick Rice wrote: > I've been reading up on the documentation for WAL shipping and warm standby > configuration. One concern that I have (a common one, I'm sure) is that it > seems that after bringing a standby server up as primary, other standby > servers (including the original primary) need to be rebased before they can > read the new primary's WALs in continuous recovery mode. > > It seems that the cause of this is a change to the leading digit of the WAL > files: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2010-03/msg00985.php > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2009-08/msg00179.php > > I was hoping that someone would shed some light on this situation with a > technical explanation. It's not clear to me why the WAL files are > incompatible or why the digit increases. What does that first digit mean to > postgresql? Is it possible to have the restore_command ignore the leading > digit? The first digit in the WAL filename is the timeline. I think we need to figure out a better way to promote slaves when there is a new master, but no one has done the research yet. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@xxxxxxxxxx> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
