Search Postgresql Archives

Re: keeping WAL after dropping replication slots

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

2017-04-05 1:55 GMT+02:00 Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
On 04/04/2017 07:45 AM, Tom DalPozzo wrote:

Postgres version?
9.6.1 

Hi,
I had two replication slots on my primary. Slaves off and (around 800)
WALs kept as expected.

Slaves off means?:

You replication set up from the master to the slaves(how many?).
Then you disconnected the slaves how?

I have 2 slaves configured with async replication but they were down  when I dropped the slots. 

So the 800 WALs number mean you have wal_keep_segments set to 800?
No,  wal_keep_segments is commented.
800 is the rough number of files I saw in xlog dir before dropping the slots.




I dropped those slots but over time, the system kept on adding new WALs
without reusing them or deleting them.
Only after shutdown and restart the system deleted those WAL files.
Is that ok?
regards
Pupillo




--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx

Regards
Pupillo


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux