Services
24×7×365 Technical Support
Migration to PostgreSQL
High Availability Deployment
Database Audit
Remote DBA for PostgreSQL
Products
Postgres Pro Enterprise
Postgres Pro Standard
Cloud Solutions
Postgres Extensions
Resources
Blog
Documentation
Webinars
Videos
Presentations
Community
Events
Training Courses
Books
Demo Database
Mailing List Archives
About
Leadership team
Partners
Customers
In the News
Press Releases
Press Info
Services
24×7×365 Technical Support
Migration to PostgreSQL
High Availability Deployment
Database Audit
Remote DBA for PostgreSQL
Products
Postgres Pro Enterprise
Postgres Pro Standard
Cloud Solutions
Postgres Extensions
Resources
Blog
Documentation
Webinars
Videos
Presentations
Community
Events
Training Courses
Books
Demo Database
Mailing List Archives
About
Leadership team
Partners
Customers
In the News
Press Releases
Press Info
Facebook
Downloads
Home
>
mailing lists
Re: WAL segment not replicated - Mailing list pgsql-admin
From
Ted EH
Subject
Re: WAL segment not replicated
Date
March 2, 2018
04:24:35
Msg-id
CA+G4h2A+n==bHb4s0tW5=5gQp=qaV+9oOU-WL8HPLj4o4dKmMA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
Raw
In response to
Re: WAL segment not replicated
(Ian Barwick <ian.barwick@2ndquadrant.com>)
List
pgsql-admin
Tree view
My reason for killing the process is to test behavior in the event of an unclean shutdown.
In the test, I made sure the former primary is being demoted to standby.
To keep things simple, I have repeated the test without restarting the former primary, and without pormoting the stby.
Before killing the main pg server process, both primary and stby have 00065 as the latest segment, under pg_wal
This time all I did is "sudo pkill postmaster", after which under pg_wal
On the stby the latest segment is still 00064, while on the primary it is now 00065
Which means a process continues to run on the primary and creates the next WAL segment (...65). Is this expected? and why?
pgsql-admin
by date:
Previous
From:
girish R G peetle
Date:
02 March 2018, 04:07:49
Subject:
pg_dump to fifo file on Linux
Next
From:
Mark Kirkwood
Date:
02 March 2018, 04:40:51
Subject:
Re: Reliable WAL file shipping over unreliable network
Есть вопросы? Напишите нам!
Соглашаюсь с условиями обработки персональных данных
I confirm that I have read and accepted PostgresPro’s
Privacy Policy
.
I agree to get Postgres Pro discount offers and other marketing communications.
✖
×
×
Everywhere
Documentation
Mailing list
List:
all lists
pgsql-general
pgsql-hackers
buildfarm-members
pgadmin-hackers
pgadmin-support
pgsql-admin
pgsql-advocacy
pgsql-announce
pgsql-benchmarks
pgsql-bugs
pgsql-chat
pgsql-cluster-hackers
pgsql-committers
pgsql-cygwin
pgsql-docs
pgsql-hackers-pitr
pgsql-hackers-win32
pgsql-interfaces
pgsql-jdbc
pgsql-jobs
pgsql-novice
pgsql-odbc
pgsql-patches
pgsql-performance
pgsql-php
pgsql-pkg-debian
pgsql-pkg-yum
pgsql-ports
pgsql-rrreviewers
pgsql-ru-general
pgsql-sql
pgsql-students
pgsql-testers
pgsql-translators
pgsql-www
psycopg
Period
anytime
within last day
within last week
within last month
within last 6 months
within last year
Sort by
date
reverse date
rank
Services
24×7×365 Technical Support
Migration to PostgreSQL
High Availability Deployment
Database Audit
Remote DBA for PostgreSQL
Products
Postgres Pro Enterprise
Postgres Pro Standard
Cloud Solutions
Postgres Extensions
Resources
Blog
Documentation
Webinars
Videos
Presentations
Community
Events
Training Courses
Books
Demo Database
Mailing List Archives
About
Leadership team
Partners
Customers
In the News
Press Releases
Press Info
By continuing to browse this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Go to
Privacy Policy
.
I accept cookies