From: | David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Wiki Page Draft for upcoming release |
Date: | 2014-03-18 02:10:54 |
Message-ID: | 1395108654390-5796505.post@n5.nabble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus wrote
> All,
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/20140320UpdateIssues
>
> I'm sure my explanation of the data corruption issue is not correct, so
> please fix it. Thanks!
I presume that because there is no way the master could have sent bad table
data to the replication slaves that performing the base backup on the slaves
is sufficient; i.e., it is not necessary to backup the master and distribute
that?
I'd either make the change myself or ask this kind of question somewhere
else more appropriate but I'm not sure of the proper protocol to follow.
David J.
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Wiki-Page-Draft-for-upcoming-release-tp5796494p5796505.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Haribabu Kommi | 2014-03-18 02:14:21 | Re: contrib/cache_scan (Re: What's needed for cache-only table scan?) |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-03-18 02:00:29 | Re: Patch: show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire |