On 01/06/2014 07:35 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 07:16:25AM -0800, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 01/06/2014 03:18 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
>>> Hoi,
>>>
>>>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean, isn't this the recommended way of doing
> things? The configuration comes from here:
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hot_Standby
>
> The master saves the archives to a directory, rsync copies them to
> the slave, where there restore_command can find them.
Well this is the above is where is could be redundant. In your original
post it would seem the archive_command and restore_command are pointing
at the same directory. I realize they are just placeholder names, so is
that the case? If so I am not sure what the rsync accomplishes. If not
why not just make it so?
The minimal cover your bases setup is usually given as:
Primary(Machine1) --> Archive --> Archive Directory(Machine2)
| |
| Streaming Restore |
-> Standby(Machine3) < -
Excuse the ASCII art.
The Standby will stream WAL unless the connection to the primary goes
down then it will pull from the Archive directory.
Not sure what your setup is and what you want. That will determine the
archiving procedure.
>
> Have a nice day,
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@gmail.com
