Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow a streaming replication standby to follow a timeline switc

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  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

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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