valgog <val...@gmail.com> writes: >> This process seems almost entirely unrelated to the documented way of >> doing it; I'm not surprised that you end up with some files not in sync. >> Please see pg_start_backup and friends.
> It was done as documented in > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/backup-incremental-updated.html Oh, I missed that you were copying from a hot-standby slave rather than the master. Still, your procedure doesn't clearly match step 2, and that step is the weak point of the process --- the grandchild slave isn't consistent until it's replayed WAL far enough, but we don't have any automated support for verifying that. (I hope that's going to get improved in 9.1.) I suspect you allowed the grandchild to go live before it was really consistent. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
