On Jul 28, 2013, at 5:29 PM, Amit Langote wrote:
> I think, the WAL recycling on standby names the recycled segments with
> the latest timelineID (in this case it's 0x10) which creates WALs that
> there shouldn't have been like 0010146A0001 instead of
> 000F146A0001. This p
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:02 AM, Ben Chobot wrote:
> Anybody?
>
> On Jul 3, 2013, at 3:23 PM, Ben Chobot wrote:
>
> We have an async streaming setup using 9.1.9 and 3 nodes - let's call them
> A, B, and C. A is the master, B and C are slaves. Today, A crashed, so we
> made B be the master and told
Anybody?
On Jul 3, 2013, at 3:23 PM, Ben Chobot wrote:
> We have an async streaming setup using 9.1.9 and 3 nodes - let's call them A,
> B, and C. A is the master, B and C are slaves. Today, A crashed, so we made B
> be the master and told C to follow along with the switch by changing the
> pr
