On 03/02/2015 03:25 PM, David Kerr wrote:
Howdy, I had an instance where a replica fell out of sync with the master. Now it's in in a state where it's unable to catch up because the master has already removed the WAL segment. (logs) Mar 2 23:10:13 db13 postgres[11099]: [3-1] user=,db=,host= LOG: streaming replication successfully connected to primary Mar 2 23:10:13 db13 postgres[11099]: [4-1] user=,db=,host= FATAL: could not receive data from WAL stream: FATAL: requested WAL segment 000000060000047C0000001F has already been removed I was under the impression that when you setup streaming replication if you specify a restore command like : restore_command = 'cp /arch/%f %p' Then even if the slave falls out of sync, and the master removes the WAL segment, as long as you can still retrieve the WAL files, then it can bring itself back into sync.
If the archive command is also set so that the restore command has a file to retrieve, then yes it will work that way.
-- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc Now I get it: your service is designed for a customer base that grew up with Facebook, watches Japanese seizure robot anime, and has the attention span of a gnat. I'm not that user., "Tyler Riddle" -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
