On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:12 PM, David Hartveld <david.hartv...@mendix.com> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:54 PM, David Hartveld <david.hartv...@mendix.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Is there possibly a known issue with the beta, or do I have to >> > configure my cluster differently for 9.1? >> >> Thanks for trying 9.1beta >> >> No known bugs, no differences in configuration. >> >> You haven't enabled any of the new 9.1 features either so they aren't likely >> to be >> at issue. >> >> So there's something pretty badly screwed up somewhere, though that looks >> like >> pilot error at the moment, sorry. >> >> I'd suggest starting again and see if you can get a reproduceable bug. >> I'd be very grateful if you can narrow things down to produce a tight bug >> report. > > I've just submitted bug report 6094, with a complete description of what I > have done. The replication stream is reproducibly very slow. If you need more > information, let me know. Bug 6094 contains no additional information and there is not yet a confirmed bug. Your output indicates that there is a problem in your replication setup and this is why the slave does not catch up. This is not a performance issue. It is either a bug in replication, or a user configuration issue. Since few things have changed in 9.1 in this area, at the moment the balance of probability is towards user error. If you can provide a more isolated bug report we may be able to investigate. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
