From: | Vincent de Phily <vincent(dot)dephily(at)mobile-devices(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, benjamin(dot)vialle(at)mobile-devices(dot)fr |
Subject: | Re: Streaming replication: sequences on slave seemingly ahead of sequences on master |
Date: | 2012-05-07 08:01:41 |
Message-ID: | 2151001.fp1eoNEqON@moltowork |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sunday 06 May 2012 10:29:17 Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 4 May 2012 14:55, Vincent de Phily <vincent(dot)dephily(at)mobile-devices(dot)fr>
wrote:
> > It all seems to be working fine, except that when checking the data
> > (selecting latest primary key and sequence value for all tables) on
> > master and slave, some sequence ids are higher on the slave than on the
> > master. I could understand if they were lower, but this is weird.
> >
> > * The slave's sequences can be anywhere between 1 and 50 ids ahead.
>
> This is normal. The sequences are advanced in chunks of 100, so the
> master's value will be the nextval() while the value on standby will
> be the start of the next chunk, so as you say, slightly ahead of the
> master.
>
> The same thing would also happen in case of a crash.
Thanks for the explanation (Michael's too).
Would be nice to see it added to the documentation (unless I just didn't find
it ?), as it is quite surprising, and might lead to problems if people expect
to be able to read sequence values from the slave.
As a bonus question, I guess it would be the same if using synchroneous
replication ?
--
Vincent de Phily
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-05-07 08:14:33 | Re: Streaming replication: sequences on slave seemingly ahead of sequences on master |
Previous Message | Michael Nolan | 2012-05-07 06:49:52 | Re: Lost one tablespace - can't access whole database |