Re: archive_command vs recovery_command paths

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 08:20:02AM +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> Hi folks
>
> Another point of confusion I've been seeing a lot in users on Stack
> Overflow, dba.stackexchange.com, etc surrounds the meaning of paths
> given in archive_command and restore_command.
>
> Lots of people seem to assume that they are both relative to the master,
> and that the master will run the restore_command to fetch archives to
> send to the replica on request.
>
> (Yes, I know that's completely missing the point of archive-based
> replication, but it seems common).
>
> So I think docs changes are needed to the explanations of those options,
> and to the replication/recovery section, that better explain that we
> assume there's shared storage like NFS involved, and if there isn't you
> need to use commands like scp/rsync instead, or use tools like WAL-E.
>
> I'm not going to get time to do this one for at least a few days, but
> I'm posting it now partly so I don't forget about it.

I have applied the attached patch which at least clarifies this issue.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +