| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Data corruption issues using streaming replication on 9.0.14/9.2.5/9.3.1 |
| Date: | 2013-11-18 20:57:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20131118205703.GA24195@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-11-18 10:58:26 -0800, Christophe Pettus wrote:
> After promotion, it was discovered that there was significant data
> loss on S1. Rows that were present on P1 were missing on S1, and some
> rows were duplicated (including duplicates that violated primary key
> and other unique constraints). The indexes were corrupt, in that they
> seemed to think that the duplicates were not duplicated, and that the
> missing rows were still present.
Were there any kind of patterns in the lost data? What kind of workload
are they running? I have an idea what the issue might be...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christophe Pettus | 2013-11-18 21:21:29 | Re: Data corruption issues using streaming replication on 9.0.14/9.2.5/9.3.1 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-11-18 20:55:07 | Re: unaccent module - two params function should be immutable |