On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> What was bothering me about the procedure is that it's not clear when
> the new slave has reached consistency, in the sense of having used WAL
> to clean up any out-of-sync conditions in the base backup it was started
> from. =A0So you can't be sure when it's okay to begin treating it as a
> trustworthy backup or potential master. =A0We track the minimum safe
> recovery point for normal PITR recovery cases, but that mechanism isn't
> available for slaves cloned according to this procedure. =A0So the DBA is
> just flying blind as to whether the slave is trustworthy yet. =A0I can't
> prove that that's what burnt the original complainant, but it fits the
> symptoms.
The step 2 of the procedure can ensure that new slave has reached
consistency. No?
Regards,
--=20
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center