Lonni J Friedman <netll...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Edson Richter
> <edsonrich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> May the cause not having enough segments (currently 80) for dropdb command?
>> Is dropdb logged in transaction log page-by-page excluded?
> I can't read portugese(?), but i think the gist of the error is that
> the WAL segment was already removed before the slave could consume it.
> I'm guessing that you aren't keeping enough of them, and dropping the
> database generated a huge volume which flushed out the old ones before
> they could get consumed by your slave.
dropdb generates one, not very large, WAL record saying "go rm -rf this
directory". So sheer WAL volume is not the correct explanation. It's
possible though that the slave spent long enough executing the rm -rf
to fall behind the master.
In any case, it should have been able to catch up automatically if WAL
archiving was configured properly.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
