Re: Cascading replication: should we detect/prevent cycles?

On 01/02/13 20:43, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
>
> On Sunday, 27 January 2013, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
> > If we're going to start installing safeguards against doing stupid
> > things, there's a long list of scenarios that happen far more
> > regularly than this ever will and cause far more damage.
>
> +1

+1

...and there are other areas that we could spend our energy on that
would be more worthwhile I think. One I'd like to see is the opposite of:

$ pg_ctl promote

i.e:

$ pg_ctl demote

So a "retired" master would read a (newly supplied perhaps)
recovery.conf and start to apply changes from there (with suitable
safeguards). We have failover pretty painless now... but reconstruction
of the original primary as a new standby is still too
fiddly/resource/time consuming etc.

Regards

Mark