Re: Synchronous replication patch v1

Hi, Pavan,

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> If the database whose timeline is the same as the primary's
>> exists in the standby, 2)3) getting new online-backup is not
>> necessary. For example, after the standby falls down, the
>> database at that time is applicable to restart it.
>>
>>
>
> If I remember correctly, when postgres finishes its recovery, it
> increments the timeline. If this is true, whenever ACT fails and SBY
> becomes primary, SBY would increment its timeline. So when the former
> ACT comes back and joins the replication as SBY, would it need to get
> a fresh backup before it can join as SBY ?

PITR from not online backup is tricky in the first place. We might not be
able to support the catch-up without a fresh online backup officially..

Furthermore, there is another problem. Please see the following mail.
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-09/msg00964.php

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center