Re: WAL segments (names) not in a sequence - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From German Becker
Subject Re: WAL segments (names) not in a sequence
Date
Msg-id CALyjCLugLBkgGm2D=cZJSs+wo4_cPOYjDcrRiChBSYmPv3+K0Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL segments (names) not in a sequence  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: WAL segments (names) not in a sequence
List pgsql-hackers
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Amit
Langote<span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:amitlangote09@gmail.com"
target="_blank">amitlangote09@gmail.com</a>></span>wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">> Maybe I didn't explain correctly. I am using
COPY/pg_dump/pg_restorefor<br /> > migration (and it is working fine). The streaming replication is for<br /> >
hot-standbyreplication *once migrated*. Thing is I disbable archving and<br /> > set wal_level to minimal, when
migratingthe large portion of data, to make<br /> > it faster. Then I switch to wal_level=hot_standby, i.e the
"production"<br/> > configuration, and the WAL segment seuqence seems to overlap with the<br /> > segments
generatedwith the other setting.<br /> ><br /><br /></div>Though, now you understand it's not what it looks like,
right?:-)<br /><br /><br /> --<br /> Amit Langote<br /></blockquote></div><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra"
style="style">Ididn't quite understand what you mean by that... But anyways so do you people think this sequence number
overlapis "normal" ?</div></div> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: background processes vs. hot standby
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: getting rid of freezing