On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:44 AM, <martin.kamp.jensen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> We are getting invalid data when reading from a synchronously >> replicated hot standby node in a 2-node setup. To better understand >> the situation, we have created a document that provides an overview. >> We are hoping that someone might be able to confirm whether or not >> the setup makes sense, i.e., whether we are using PostgreSQL >> correctly and experiencing a bug, or if we are using PostgreSQL >> incorrectly. >> >> Link to document that contains a step-by-step description of the >> situation: >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MuX8rq1gKw_WZ-HVflqxFslvXNTRGKa77A4NHto4ue0/edit?usp=sharing Please include such information in your post or as an attachment. Who knows whether that link will still be usable and unchanged 20 years from now? >> If the setup is sane (and expected to work), I didn't see anywhere that you correctly handled WAL in setting up your standby. I am not surprised by there being corruption, including duplicate keys in a unique index. You might try -x or -X when you run pg_basebackup, or use archiving. Whatever you do, do NOT delete the backup_label file! > In the mean time, we are preparing a new platform on 9.5.2 where > I have not been able to reproduce the issue (however, we have > introduced a lot of changes besides upgrading PostgreSQL). We would need a lot more detail to be able to even guess at whether you have actually solved the flaws in your process or have just been lucky so far. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
