From: | Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Stephen Denne <Stephen(dot)Denne(at)datamail(dot)co(dot)nz>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2008-06-04 10:51:26 |
Message-ID: | 484673AE.7040809@sigaev.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
>
> Hmm, WAL version compatibility is an interesting question. Most minor
> releases hasn't changed the WAL format, and it would be nice to allow
As I remember, high minor version should read all WALs from lowers, but it isn't
true for opposite case and between different major versions.
> running different minor versions in the master and slave in those cases.
> But it's certainly not unheard of to change the WAL format. Perhaps we
> should introduce a WAL version number, similar to catalog version?
Agree. Right now it only touches warm-stand-by servers, but introducing simple
log-shipping and based on it replication will cause a lot of unobvious
errors/bugs. Is it possible to use catalog version number as WAL version?
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Csaba Nagy | 2008-06-04 10:58:53 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-06-04 08:13:52 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Csaba Nagy | 2008-06-04 10:58:53 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-06-04 08:13:52 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |