Re: Synchronous replication patch v1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavan Deolasee
Subject Re: Synchronous replication patch v1
Date
Msg-id 2e78013d0811060435u10e6542v65c21a6759a31001@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Synchronous replication patch v1  ("Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Synchronous replication patch v1
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If the database whose timeline is the same as the primary's
> exists in the standby, 2)3) getting new online-backup is not
> necessary. For example, after the standby falls down, the
> database at that time is applicable to restart it.
>
>

If I remember correctly, when postgres finishes its recovery, it
increments the timeline. If this is true, whenever ACT fails and SBY
becomes primary, SBY would increment its timeline. So when the former
ACT comes back and joins the replication as SBY, would it need to get
a fresh backup before it can join as SBY ?

Thanks,
Pavan

-- 
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB     http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "xie jiong"
Date:
Subject: question about large object
Next
From: Volkan YAZICI
Date:
Subject: Re: question about large object