Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery (v8)
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery (v8) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1226101491.31701.29.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Infrastructure changes for recovery (v8) (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery (v8)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 23:52 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > * optional recovery_safe_start_location parameter now provided in > recovery.conf, to allow a consistency point to be manually defined if a > base backup was not taken using standard pg_start/stop backup functions If using synchronous replication, it seems like this may be useful. For instance, if the primary server A fails (let's assume power off failure), then you make the secondary server B the new primary and start committing transactions, and then you want to bring A back up as a secondary to B. Will server A know where to start recovering from, even if many checkpoints have happened on server B in the meantime? Is there a way to avoid wiping A and making a new base backup? Are the safety issues that Heikki brought up potentially solvable, or am I asking for the impossible? And also, what if server A is shut down cleanly? Is there any way at all to get it into recovery mode to catch up with B, or would it require a new base backup? I haven't read through the entire thread, so I apologize if this question has been answered elsewhere. Regards,Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: