Re: Updated version of pg_receivexlog

From: Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Updated version of pg_receivexlog
Date: 2012-06-04 14:25:07
Message-ID: CA+CSw_s4gAm=hQHANwDyABztfJ_qdS1mQDeHLtLv8AHtsosE=Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> it doesn't say that is not possible to use this for a standby
>> server... probably that's why i get the error i put a recovery.conf
>> after pg_basebackup finished... maybe we can say that  more loudly?
>
> The idea is, if you use it with -x (or --xlog), it's for taking a
> backup/clone, *not* for replication.
>
> If you use it without -x, then you can use it as the start of a
> replica, by adding a recovery.conf.
>
> But you can't do both at once, that will confuse it.

I stumbled upon this again today. There's nothing in the docs that
would even hint that using -x shouldn't work to create a replica. Why
does it get confused and can we (easily) make it not get confused? At
the very least it needs a big fat warning in documentation for the -x
option that the resulting backup might not be usable as a standby.

Ants Aasma
--
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-06-04 14:51:22 Re: [RFC] Interface of Row Level Security
Previous Message Ants Aasma 2012-06-04 14:20:59 Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile