Re: [GENERAL] Replication slot and pg_rewind

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Bhattacharyya, Subhro wrote: > Our expectation is that slave will be able to sync with the new master with > the help of whatever WALs are present in the new master due to replication > slots. > Can pg_rewind still work without WAL archiving in this scenario. I s

Re: [GENERAL] Replication slot and pg_rewind

-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Replication slot and pg_rewind On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Bhattacharyya, Subhro wrote: > We are using the replication slot and pg_rewind feature of postgresql 9.6 > Our cluster consists of 1 master and 1 slave node. > > The replication

Re: [GENERAL] Replication slot and pg_rewind

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Bhattacharyya, Subhro wrote: > We are using the replication slot and pg_rewind feature of postgresql 9.6 > Our cluster consists of 1 master and 1 slave node. > > The replication slot feature allows the master to keep as much WAL as is > required by the slave. > > T

Re: [GENERAL] replication slot to be used in the future

2017-01-04 18:24 GMT+01:00 Adrian Klaver : > On 01/04/2017 08:44 AM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: > >> Hi, >> > > Postgres version? > > Because in 9.6: > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/functions-admin.h > tml#FUNCTIONS-REPLICATION > > Table 9-82. Replication SQL Functions > > pg_create_physic

Re: [GENERAL] replication slot to be used in the future

On 01/04/2017 08:44 AM, Tom DalPozzo wrote: Hi, Postgres version? Because in 9.6: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/functions-admin.html#FUNCTIONS-REPLICATION Table 9-82. Replication SQL Functions pg_create_physical_replication_slot(slot_name name [, immediately_reserve boolean ])

Re: [GENERAL] replication setup: advice needed

> You need to look at a replication solution like Slony, which is a trigger > based replication solution. If you are using PostgreSQL version 9.4 or > higher, then, you can explore "pglogical" which is WAL based and uses > logical decoding capability. I'm using 9.4, and I'm looking at pglogical as

Re: [GENERAL] replication setup: advice needed

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:17 PM, Dmitry Karasik wrote: > Dear all, > > I'd like to ask for help or advice with choosing the best replication > setup for > my task. > > I need to listen to continuous inserts/deletes/updates over a set of > tables, > and serve them over http, so I would like to off-

Re: [GENERAL] Replication (BDR) problem: won't catch up after connection timeout

See also https://github.com/2ndQuadrant/bdr/issues/233 -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] Replication (BDR) problem: won't catch up after connection timeout

Increase wal_sender_timeout to resolve the issue. I've been investigating just this issue recently. See https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/camsr+ye2dsfhvr7iev1gspzihitwx-pmkd9qalegctya+sd...@mail.gmail.com . It would be very useful to me to know more about the transaction that caused this prob

Re: [GENERAL] Replication rolling back to normal.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Dasitha Karunajeewa wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Thanks a lot for the information. I am totally new to Postgres clustering. I > have follow up the below-attached article. > https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-set-up-master-slave-replication-on-postg

Re: [GENERAL] Replication rolling back to normal.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Dasitha Karunajeewa wrote: > What I want to know is how to switch them back to the normal status. That > means pgmaster need to be the Master server which acept the writed and > pgslave that accepts only reads along with the replication. If your promoted standby

Re: [GENERAL] Replication slot on master failure

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:49 PM, hariprasath nallasamy wrote: >We are using replication slot for capturing some change sets to > update dependent tables. >Will there be inconsistency if the master fails and the standby takes > the role of master.? Replication slot creation is not

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Recommendation

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: > * Because database is updated infrequently, workforce can come > together for LAN-based replication as needed > * Entire database is on the order of a few GB Just update one copy, then send pg_dump's to the others for stomping over the ol

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Recommendation

On 09/12/2016 02:35 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: On 09/12/2016 12:46 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: There are a wide variety of Postgres replication solutions, and I would like advice on which one would be appropriate to my use case. * Small

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Recommendation

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 09/12/2016 12:46 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: >> >> There are a wide variety of Postgres replication solutions, and I >> would like advice on which one would be appropriate to my use case. >> >> * Small (~half dozen) distributed workforce u

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Recommendation

On 09/12/2016 12:46 PM, Lee Hachadoorian wrote: There are a wide variety of Postgres replication solutions, and I would like advice on which one would be appropriate to my use case. * Small (~half dozen) distributed workforce using a file sharing service, but without access to direct network con

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with non-read-only standby.

uot; To: "Nick Babadzhanian" Cc: "pgsql-general" Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2016 11:00:05 PM Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Replication with non-read-only standby. 2016-06-30 15:15 GMT+02:00 Nick Babadzhanian : > Setup: > 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The fi

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with non-read-only standby.

2016-06-30 15:15 GMT+02:00 Nick Babadzhanian : > Setup: > 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The first one is used for > an application that gathers data. It is connected to the second database > that is used to process the said data. Connection is not very stable nor is > it fast, so

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with non-read-only standby.

Il 01/07/2016 05:21, Venkata Balaji N ha scritto: On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:15 PM, Nick Babadzhanian wrote: Setup: 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The first one

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with non-read-only standby.

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:15 PM, Nick Babadzhanian wrote: > Setup: > 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The first one is used for > an application that gathers data. It is connected to the second database > that is used to process the said data. Connection is not very stable nor is

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with non-read-only standby.

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Nick Babadzhanian wrote: > Setup: > 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The first one is used for an > application that gathers data. It is connected to the second database that is > used to process the said data. Connection is not very stable nor is

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

Hi, Thx you for answering. Regards, Bertrand 2016-06-06 10:22 GMT+02:00 Vik Fearing : > On 06/06/16 09:54, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: > >> On 02/06/16 15:32, Bertrand Paquet wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On an hot standby streaming server, is

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On 06/06/16 09:54, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: >> On 02/06/16 15:32, Bertrand Paquet wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On an hot standby streaming server, is there any way to know, in SQL, to >>> know the ip of current master ? >> >> No. >> >>> The solution I

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: > On 02/06/16 15:32, Bertrand Paquet wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On an hot standby streaming server, is there any way to know, in SQL, to >> know the ip of current master ? > > No. > >> The solution I have is to read the recovery.conf file to find >> pri

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On 02/06/16 18:39, John R Pierce wrote: > On 6/2/2016 6:32 AM, Bertrand Paquet wrote: >> On an hot standby streaming server, is there any way to know, in SQL, >> to know the ip of current master ? >> The solution I have is to read the recovery.conf file to find >> primary_conninfo, but, it can be f

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On 02/06/16 15:32, Bertrand Paquet wrote: > Hi, > > On an hot standby streaming server, is there any way to know, in SQL, to > know the ip of current master ? No. > The solution I have is to read the recovery.conf file to find > primary_conninfo, That is currently the only solution. There are

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On 6/2/2016 6:32 AM, Bertrand Paquet wrote: On an hot standby streaming server, is there any way to know, in SQL, to know the ip of current master ? The solution I have is to read the recovery.conf file to find primary_conninfo, but, it can be false. "The IP" assumes there is only one... hos

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On Thu, 2 Jun 2016, 10:34 p.m. Scott Mead, wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Melvin Davidson > wrote: > >> It's been a few years since I worked with slony, and you did not state >> which version of slony or PostgreSQL you are working with, nor did you >> indicate the O/S. >> > > I think

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > It's been a few years since I worked with slony, and you did not state > which version of slony or PostgreSQL you are working with, nor did you > indicate the O/S. > I think OP had pointed to using streaming > That being said, you s

Re: [GENERAL] Replication

It's been a few years since I worked with slony, and you did not state which version of slony or PostgreSQL you are working with, nor did you indicate the O/S. That being said, you should be able to formulate a query with a join between sl_path & sl_node that gives you the information you need. On

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Question

Thanks for the help. We need an upgrade on the DB for the solution. I checked your suggestion and it works on versions from 9.1 and above Regards On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Andreas Kretschmer < akretsch...@spamfence.net> wrote: > Bala Venkat wrote: > > > Hi there - > > > >We

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Question

Bala Venkat wrote: > Hi there - > >    We have a set up where there is One master streaming to 3 Slaves .  > 2 slaves are in our DR environment. One is the prod environment.  > >   Wanted to make the DR as primary. I know we can make the one of the > slave in DR to primary. If I

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: > > (Seems like you forgot to push the Reply-all button) > > > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Madovsky wrote: > >> On 10/3/2015 3:30 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > >>> and no reason

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > (Seems like you forgot to push the Reply-all button) > > On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Madovsky wrote: >> On 10/3/2015 3:30 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> and no reason is given to justify *why* this would be needed in your case >> reaso

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On 10/4/2015 3:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: (Seems like you forgot to push the Reply-all button) On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Madovsky wrote: On 10/3/2015 3:30 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: and no reason is given to justify *why* this would be needed in your case reason for a choice can

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

(Seems like you forgot to push the Reply-all button) On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Madovsky wrote: > On 10/3/2015 3:30 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> and no reason is given to justify *why* this would be needed in your case > reason for a choice can be often an issue for other :D > > I thought t

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Madovsky wrote: > On 10/3/2015 6:55 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Madovsky wrote: >> Requesting the master would be necessary, still I don't really get why >> you don't want to query the master for read queries... You could for >> exa

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On 10/3/2015 6:55 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Madovsky wrote: On 10/3/2015 4:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Madovsky wrote: I would like to fix a issue I'm facing of with the version 9.4 streaming replication. is it possible t

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Madovsky wrote: > > > On 10/3/2015 4:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Madovsky wrote: >>> >>> I would like to fix a issue I'm facing of with the version 9.4 streaming >>> replication. >>> is it possible to set on the fly the sync

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On 10/3/2015 4:48 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Madovsky wrote: I would like to fix a issue I'm facing of with the version 9.4 streaming replication. is it possible to set on the fly the synchronous commit on the master (or standby?) which only sync commit the hot

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

Hi On 10/3/2015 5:46 AM, Edson Richter wrote: Madovsky escreveu > Hi, > > I would like to fix a issue I'm facing of with the version 9.4 streaming > replication. > is it possible to set on the fly the synchronous commit on the master > (or standby?) > which only sync commit the ho

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

Madovsky escreveu > Hi, > > I would like to fix a issue I'm facing of with the version 9.4 streaming > replication. > is it possible to set on the fly the synchronous commit on the master > (or standby?) > which only sync commit the hot standby node used by the client who has a > r

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with 9.4

On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Madovsky wrote: > I would like to fix a issue I'm facing of with the version 9.4 streaming > replication. > is it possible to set on the fly the synchronous commit on the master (or > standby?) > which only sync commit the hot standby node used by the client who has

Re: [GENERAL] Replication fell out of sync

On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 04:06:02PM PDT, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 03/02/2015 03:25 PM, David Kerr wrote: > >Howdy, > > > >I had an instance where a replica fell out of sync with the master. > > > >Now it's in in a state where it's unable to catch up because the master has > >already removed the WA

Re: [GENERAL] Replication fell out of sync

On 03/02/2015 03:25 PM, David Kerr wrote: Howdy, I had an instance where a replica fell out of sync with the master. Now it's in in a state where it's unable to catch up because the master has already removed the WAL segment. (logs) Mar 2 23:10:13 db13 postgres[11099]: [3-1] user=,db=,host=

Re: [GENERAL] Replication fell out of sync

On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 03:33:22PM PDT, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > On 03/02/2015 03:25 PM, David Kerr wrote: > > > >Howdy, > > > >I had an instance where a replica fell out of sync with the master. > > > >Now it's in in a state where it's unable to catch up because the master has > >already remov

Re: [GENERAL] Replication fell out of sync

On 03/02/2015 03:25 PM, David Kerr wrote: Howdy, I had an instance where a replica fell out of sync with the master. Now it's in in a state where it's unable to catch up because the master has already removed the WAL segment. (logs) Mar 2 23:10:13 db13 postgres[11099]: [3-1] user=,db=,host

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: How to query current segments allocation relative to "Wal keep segments"?

On 05-01-2015 10:02, Michael Paquier wrote: On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter wrote: Would this kind of count being recorded somewhere else? How does the server knows that the wal_segments have been exhausted? You should evaluate the amount of wal_keep_segments nec

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: How to query current segments allocation relative to "Wal keep segments"?

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter wrote: > Would this kind of count being recorded somewhere else? > How does the server knows that the wal_segments have been exhausted? You should evaluate the amount of wal_keep_segments necessary using the replication lag in terms of

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: How to query current segments allocation relative to "Wal keep segments"?

On 05-01-2015 02:08, Michael Paquier wrote: On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 1:48 AM, Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter wrote: How to query current segments allocation relative to "Wal keep segments" in each master server? What is your server version? You can have a look at pg_stat_replication on the mast

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: How to query current segments allocation relative to "Wal keep segments"?

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 1:48 AM, Edson Carlos Ericksson Richter wrote: > How to query current segments allocation relative to "Wal keep segments" in > each master server? What is your server version? You can have a look at pg_stat_replication on the master which contains information about the WAL

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

On 3/11/2014 5:50 AM, Aggarwal, Ajay wrote: Thats exactly what I was thinking after all other experiments. Couple of questions: 1) why did you say that 300 seconds is the upper limit? Is this enforced by Postgres? What if I want to set it to 10 minutes? 2) whats the downside of bigger replicati

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] on behalf of John R Pierce [pie...@hogranch.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 9:58 PM To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup On 3/9/2014 6:52 PM

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

On 3/9/2014 6:52 PM, Aggarwal, Ajay wrote: Our replication timeout is default 60 seconds. If we increase the replication time to say 180 seconds, we see better results but backups still fail occasionally. so increase it to 300 seconds, or whatever. thats an upper limit, it needs to be big e

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

wish there was a way to slow down pg_basebackup or force it to use direct I/O. From: Haribabu Kommi [kommi.harib...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 8:31 PM To: Aggarwal, Ajay Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] replication timeo

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

force it to use direct I/O. From: Haribabu Kommi [kommi.harib...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 8:31 PM To: Aggarwal, Ajay Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 7:07 AM

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 7:07 AM, Aggarwal, Ajay wrote: > Thanks Hari Babu. > > I think what is happening is that my dirty cache builds up quickly for the > volume where I am backing up. This would trigger flush of these dirty pages > to the disk. While this flush is going on pg_basebackup tries to

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

207.248 ops/sec Non-Sync'ed 8kB writes: write 202216.900 ops/sec From: Haribabu Kommi [kommi.harib...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 1:42 AM To: Aggarwal, Ajay Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re:

Re: [GENERAL] replication timeout in pg_basebackup

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Aggarwal, Ajay wrote: > Our environment: Postgres version 9.2.2 running on CentOS 6.4 > > Our backups using pg_basebackup are frequently failing with following error > > "pg_basebackup: could not send feedback packet: server closed the connection > unexpectedly

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Albe Laurenz > wrote: >> Joe Van Dyk wrote: >>> If I run "COPY (select * from complicate_view) to stdout" on the standby, >>> I've noticed that sometimes >>> halts replication updates to the slave. >>> >>> For example, that's happening r

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: >> I meant all the replication settings, see [1]. And pg_stat_statements >> when there is a problem, preferable the error, because when everything >> is okay it is not very useful actually. > > I don't understand, how is pg_stat_statements helpf

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Sergey Konoplev > wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > >> > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Sergey Konoplev > >>

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 12/18/2013 12:15 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: >> >> A possibly related question: >> >> I've set wal_keep_segments to 10,000 and also have archive_command >> running wal-e. I'm seeing my wal files disappear from pg_xlog after 30 >> minutes. Is th

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: >> > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Sergey Konoplev >> > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: >>

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Sergey Konoplev > wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > >> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Sergey Konoplev > >>

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: GZIP compression in WAL sender/receiver processes communication?

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Dmitry Koterov wrote: > Is there a way to compress the traffic between master and slave during the > replication?.. The streaming gzip would be quite efficient for that. Take a look at the ssh_tunnel.sh [1] tool. This is a wrapper around SSH tunnel with compression

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote: > Joe Van Dyk wrote: >> If I run "COPY (select * from complicate_view) to stdout" on the standby, >> I've noticed that sometimes >> halts replication updates to the slave. >> >> For example, that's happening right now and "now() - >> pg_last_

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

Joe Van Dyk wrote: > If I run "COPY (select * from complicate_view) to stdout" on the standby, > I've noticed that sometimes > halts replication updates to the slave. > > For example, that's happening right now and "now() - > pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp()" is 22 minutes. > There's many transac

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: >> > I'm running Postgresql 9.3. I have a streaming replication server. >> > Someone >> > was running a long COPY query (8 hour

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Sergey Konoplev wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > > I'm running Postgresql 9.3. I have a streaming replication server. > Someone > > was running a long COPY query (8 hours) on the standby which halted > > replication. The replication

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: > I'm running Postgresql 9.3. I have a streaming replication server. Someone > was running a long COPY query (8 hours) on the standby which halted > replication. The replication stopped at 3:30 am. I canceled the long-running > query at 9:30 am

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

On 12/18/2013 12:15 PM, Joe Van Dyk wrote: A possibly related question: I've set wal_keep_segments to 10,000 and also have archive_command running wal-e. I'm seeing my wal files disappear from pg_xlog after 30 minutes. Is that expected? Is there a way around that? Well a WAL segment is 16MB in

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

Joe Van Dyk writes: > I'm running Postgresql 9.3. I have a streaming replication server. Someone > was running a long COPY query (8 hours) on the standby which halted > replication. The > replication stopped at 3:30 am. I canceled the long-running query at 9:30 am > and replication data starte

Re: [GENERAL] Replication failed after stalling

A possibly related question: I've set wal_keep_segments to 10,000 and also have archive_command running wal-e. I'm seeing my wal files disappear from pg_xlog after 30 minutes. Is that expected? Is there a way around that? (I want to use streaming replication and wal-e for PITR restores) On Wed,

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: GZIP compression in WAL sender/receiver processes communication?

Hello, Yes gzip compression can be used for compressing WAL traffic during streaming replication Following tools can be used in this regard. SSL compression-SSL support is built in PostgreSQL. You need to ensure you have OpenSSL library support in your PostgreSQL installation. Also, you can compr

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: GZIP compression in WAL sender/receiver processes communication?

Hello, Yes, gzip compression can be used for compressing WAL traffic during streaming replication Following tools can be used in this regard. SSL compression-SSL support is built in PostgreSQL. You need to ensure you have OpenSSL library support in your PostgreSQL installation. Also, you can comp

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: GZIP compression in WAL sender/receiver processes communication?

On 12/9/2013 3:13 PM, Dmitry Koterov wrote: Is there a way to compress the traffic between master and slave during the replication?.. The streaming gzip would be quite efficient for that. (WAL archiving is not too good for this purpose because of high lag. I just need to minimize the cross-dat

Re: [GENERAL] Replication: GZIP compression in WAL sender/receiver processes communication?

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Dmitry Koterov wrote: > Hello. > > Is there a way to compress the traffic between master and slave during the > replication?.. The streaming gzip would be quite efficient for that. > > (WAL archiving is not too good for this purpose because of high lag. I just > ne

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

Tomas Vondra wrote: > I think it's safe as long as you don't try to reuse the cluster > after a crash (be it due to OS error, power outage, ...). If the > primary crashes for any reasons, you have to start from scratch, > otherwise there might be silent corruption as you've described. I agree. 

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

Hi, On 24.10.2013 23:18, Alban Hertroys wrote: > On Oct 24, 2013, at 18:10, maillis...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Thank you for the answers. I'm still confused. If fsync is not >> replicated to the slave, then how is replication affected by a >> corrupt master? If the master dies and there's a commit

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

DDT wrote: > According to manual, when you set "synchronous_commit" to on, the transaction > commits will wait until > master and slave flush the commit record of transaction to the physical > storage, so I think even if > turn off the fsync on master is safe for data consistency and data will no

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

Dear According to manual, when you set "synchronous_commit" to on, the transaction commits will wait until master and slave flush the commit record of transaction to the physical storage, so I think even if turn off the fsync on master is safe for data consistency and data will not be lost if s

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

On Oct 24, 2013, at 18:10, maillis...@gmail.com wrote: > Thank you for the answers. I'm still confused. If fsync is not replicated to > the slave, then how is replication affected by a corrupt master? If the > master dies and there's a commit recorded in the wal log that didn't actually > happe

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 6:39 PM, wrote: > Newb question. > > I'm running 9.1 with a slave using streaming replication. A coworker wants > to turn off fsync on the master and insists that the slave will still be in > a usable state if there is a failure on the master. > This would only be safe if

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

Thank you for the answers. I'm still confused. If fsync is not replicated to the slave, then how is replication affected by a corrupt master? If the master dies and there's a commit recorded in the wal log that didn't actually happen, wouldn't the slave still be expected to be in a sane state, with

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

On 24 October 2013 15:04, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:39 AM, wrote: >> Am I wrong? If I'm wrong, is there still danger to the slave >> in this kind of setup? > > No, I think. Corruption due to fsync being off on the master will be replicated to the slave, or - if corruption

Re: [GENERAL] Replication and fsync

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:39 AM, wrote: > Newb question. > > I'm running 9.1 with a slave using streaming replication. A coworker wants > to turn off fsync on the master and insists that the slave will still be in > a usable state if there is a failure on the master. We all know that turning > o

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Postgre > Oracle

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 > ...replication between PostgreSQL 9.2.4 and Oracle Database ... > We also thank to develop a solution based on trigger and/or WAL Before you reinvent that first wheel, check out Bucardo, which is a trigger-based solution that can go from Pos

Re: [GENERAL] Replication delay

Thanks so much. On 11 Aug 2013, at 9:50 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:51 AM, ascot.m...@gmail.com > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have a pair of PG servers, a master and a replica, all read-write queries >> are handled by the master, read-only ones are by the replica. >> >> F

Re: [GENERAL] Replication delay

> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:51 AM, ascot.m...@gmail.com > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have a pair of PG servers, a master and a replica, all read-write queries >> are handled by the master, read-only ones are by the replica. >> >> From time to time the replica itself is too busy, all read-only queries

Re: [GENERAL] replication server: LOG: invalid magic number 0000 in log file 169, segment 77, offset 4325376

Thanks so much. On 11 Aug 2013, at 7:36 PM, Jov wrote: > This means the slave meet the end of the WAL when it replay the WAL > files/records.The message level is "LOG",so it can be safely ignored. > > Jov > blog: http:amutu.com/blog > > > 2013/8/11 ascot.m...@gmail.com > Hi, > > I found 'LO

Re: [GENERAL] Replication delay

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 5:51 AM, ascot.m...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi, > > I have a pair of PG servers, a master and a replica, all read-write queries > are handled by the master, read-only ones are by the replica. > > From time to time the replica itself is too busy, all read-only queries will > ge

Re: [GENERAL] replication server: LOG: invalid magic number 0000 in log file 169, segment 77, offset 4325376

This means the slave meet the end of the WAL when it replay the WAL files/records.The message level is "LOG",so it can be safely ignored. Jov blog: http:amutu.com/blog 2013/8/11 ascot.m...@gmail.com > Hi, > > I found 'LOG: invalid magic number in log file 169, seg

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Postgre > Oracle

Hi, >From Oracle to PostgreSQL, you could have a look at Goldengate. It does not support PostgreSQL as the source database. Regards, Jayadevan On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:54 PM, BOUVARD Aurélien < aurelien.bouv...@supinfo.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > ** ** > > My compagny would like to configure

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Postgre > Oracle

Postgres Plus Advanced Server (PPAS) is a licensed version of PostgreSQL owned by EnterpriseDB. You need to buy a support contract to use this software (although there is a 45 day trial period). The component you are talking about is xDB Replication Server, which is part of the PPAS product or can

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Postgre > Oracle

On 07/08/13 20:24, BOUVARD Aurélien wrote: Hi all, My compagny would like to configure replication between PostgreSQL 9.2.4 and Oracle Database (11g and maybe 12c soon). We saw that/Postgres Plus Database Replication /could be a good solution for us.// // We also thank to develop a soluti

Re: [GENERAL] REPLICATION Stopped abruptly

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 9:35 AM, akp geek wrote: > Hi All - > > We have been running postgres 9.0.2 since October. Streaming also in > place. Working flawless. yesterday suddenly the replication stopped. Did you write that correctly? If so, Postgres 9.0 is on patch release 9.0.13. Pri

Re: [GENERAL] replication stops working

On Jul 8, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Daniel Serodio (lists) wrote: > If there are no errors in the log, how did you conclude that replication has > stopped working? Since you're using a hot standby, you've also setup > streaming replication in addition to the WAL archiving, correct? I have an externa

Re: [GENERAL] replication stops working

John DeSoi wrote: I have a 9.2 hot standby setup with replication via rsync. For the second time, it has stopped working with no apparent error on the primary or standby. Last time this happened I fixed it by restarting the primary. Yesterday I started a new base backup around noon and it repl

Re: [GENERAL] Replication with Drop: could not open relation with OID

On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:58:35 -0700 (PDT) salah jubeh wrote: > Hello, > > > I have a database server which do a complex  views calculation,  the result > of those views are shipped to another database servers via a simple  > replication tool which have a high  client loads. > > > The tool 

  1   2   3   4   5   >