From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | depesz(at)depesz(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow a streaming replication standby to follow a timeline switc |
Date: | 2012-12-20 12:50:12 |
Message-ID: | 50D30984.2010204@vmware.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-general |
On 18.12.2012 13:42, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> In pg_log on ubuntu2 I see:
>
> 2012-12-18 12:41:34.428 CET [unknown](at)[unknown] 1685 LOG: connection received: host=172.28.173.142 port=45842
> 2012-12-18 12:41:34.430 CET replication(at)[unknown] 1685 172.28.173.142(45842) LOG: replication connection authorized: user=replication
> 2012-12-18 12:41:34.432 CET replication(at)[unknown] 1685 172.28.173.142(45842) ERROR: requested WAL segment 000000020000000000000015 has already been removed
> 2012-12-18 12:41:34.433 CET replication(at)[unknown] 1685 172.28.173.142(45842) LOG: disconnection: session time: 0:00:00.005 user=replication database= host=172.28.173.142 port=45842
>
> Something looks weird. To put it lightly.
Hmm, that's a different error than you got before. Thom also reported a
"requested WAL segment ... has already been removed" error, but in his
test case, and as far as I could reproduce it, the error doesn't reoccur
when the standby reconnects. In other words, it eventually worked
despite that error. In any case, I just committed a fix for the scenario
that Thom reported. Can you try again with a fresh checkout?
- Heikki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-12-20 18:56:33 | pgsql: Avoid using NAMEDATALEN in pg_upgrade |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2012-12-20 12:41:32 | pgsql: Follow TLI of last replayed record, not recovery target TLI, in |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert James | 2012-12-20 13:45:09 | Re: DONT_CARE Aggregate |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-12-20 11:37:46 | Re: [GENERAL] trouble with pg_upgrade 9.0 -> 9.1 |