| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hot standby off of hot standby? |
| Date: | 2012-01-30 18:06:09 |
| Message-ID: | 4F26DC11.1040107@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 1/29/12 8:36 PM, Igor Schtein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to use a standby instance as a master/primary for another
> standby in Postgres 9.0? In other words, does PG 9.0 supports cascading
> standby configuration?
No, that's a 9.2 feature in development.
If you can build PostgreSQL from source and apply patches, we could use
your help testing it!
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-01-30 18:35:21 | Re: [GENERAL] Why extract( ... from timestamp ) is not immutable? |
| Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2012-01-30 17:53:45 | Re: pg_dump -s dumps data?! |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marko Kreen | 2012-01-30 18:15:39 | Re: Speed dblink using alternate libpq tuple storage |
| Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2012-01-30 17:53:45 | Re: pg_dump -s dumps data?! |