Re: Strange replication problem - segment restored from archive but still requested from master

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Piotr Gasidło
Тема Re: Strange replication problem - segment restored from archive but still requested from master
Дата
Msg-id CAF8akQs8X5dW6fqPY6ZEzts1Ttu-5B1fPg6eKkDw--MOOphE7w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Strange replication problem - segment restored from archive but still requested from master  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Strange replication problem - segment restored from archive but still requested from master
Список pgsql-general
2015-05-22 6:55 GMT+02:00 Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>:
>
> This problem happens when WAL record is stored in separate two WAL files and
> there is no valid latter WAL file in the standby. In your case, the former file
> is 0000000400004C4D00000090 and the latter is 0000000400004C4D00000091.
>
> In this case, the first half of WAL record can be read from the former WAL file,
> but the remaining half not because no valid latter file exists in the standby.
> Then the standby tries to retrieve the latter WAL file via replication.
> The problem here is that the standby tries to start the replication from the
> starting point of WAL record, i.e., that's the location of the former WAL file.
> So the already-read WAL file is requested via replication.
> (..)

I currently have wal_keep_segments set to 0.
Setting this to higher value will help? As I understand: master won't
delete segment and could stream it to slave on request - so it will
help.
Does this setting delays WAL archiving?

--
Piotr Gasidło


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bill Moran
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Allowing postgresql to accept 0xff syntax for data types that it makes sense for?
Следующее
От: Bill Moran
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Allowing postgresql to accept 0xff syntax for data types that it makes sense for?