On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 10:39:26AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote: > Ok, so the problem is that that checkpoint might be still ongoing when > you quickly issue a pg_rewind from the other side?
The end-of-recovery checkpoint may not have even begun. > I think it might be useful to specify more exactly which of the two > servers (the remote one AIUI) needs a CHECKPOINT in the above. Also, if > it is the case that a CHECKPOINT is done automatically (see above), that > paragraph could be rewritten to say something like "pg_rewind needs to > wait for the checkoint on the remote server to finish. This can be > ensured by issueing an explicit checkpoint on the remote server prior to > running pg_rewind." Well, the target server needs to be cleanly shut down, so it seems pretty clear to me which one needs to have a checkpoint :) > Finally, (and still, if I got the above correctly), to the suggestion of > Magnus of pg_rewind running the checkpoint itself on the remote: would > that again mean that pg_rewind needs SUPERUSER rights or is there > a(nother) GRANTable function that could be added to the list in this > case? pg_rewind would require again a superuser. So this could be optional. In one HA workflow I maintain, what I actually do is to enforce directly a checkpoint immediately after the promotion is done to make sure that the data is up-to-date, and I don't meddle with pg_rewind workflow. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
