On October 29, 2010, "Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)"
wrote:
> On 2010-10-29 11:17, Alan Hodgson wrote:
> > I'm curious about this too. It seems that currently I'd have to
> > rebuild any additional slaves basically from scratch to use the new
> > master.
>
> I think so long as you "pointed" (vi
On 2010-10-29 11:17, Alan Hodgson wrote:
I'm curious about this too. It seems that currently I'd have to
rebuild any additional slaves basically from scratch to use the new
master.
I think so long as you "pointed" (via primary_conninfo) the additional
slaves to the new (pending) master, befor
On October 29, 2010, "Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)"
wrote:
> My question is, how do I configure the other three (still) hot_standby
> boxes to now use the new primary? Clearly I can change the
> "recovery.conf" file on each standby box, but that seems like an
> unnecessary nuisance.
I'm curio
Oops; previously sent from the wrong eMail address, so I don't know if
this actually got sent:
Two days ago I upgraded five DB boxes (for load balancing) from 8.3.0 to
9.0.1 in order to use replication. The replication configuration went
reasonably well, and now all the four "hot_standby" serv
On 10/28/10 11:25 PM, Dean Gibson AE7Q wrote:
Two days ago I upgraded five DB boxes (for load balancing) from 8.3.0
to 9.0.1 in order to use replication. The replication configuration
went reasonably well, and now all the four "hot_standby" servers are
(streaming) replicating just fine from the
Two days ago I upgraded five DB boxes (for load balancing) from 8.3.0 to
9.0.1 in order to use replication. The replication configuration went
reasonably well, and now all the four "hot_standby" servers are
(streaming) replicating just fine from the primary DB server. If the
primary fails and
