2016-11-29 16:36 GMT+13:00 David G. Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Patrick B <patrickbake...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> Ho >> [w] >> is that even possible?? I don't understand! >> >> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/static/warm-standby.html > """ > > If you use streaming replication without file-based continuous archiving, > you have to set wal_keep_segments in the master to a value high enough to > ensure that old WAL segments are not recycled too early, while the standby > might still need them to catch up. If the standby falls behind too much, it > needs to be reinitialized from a new base backup. If you set up a WAL > archive that's accessible from the standby, wal_keep_segments is not > required as the standby can always use the archive to catch up. > """ > > Basically you did just that when you destroyed the archive. Apparently > the master doesn't churn through WAL quickly enough to have had to discard > the segments from the prior two hours. > > David J. > > > That was really helpful! Thanks David! Patrick
