On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 2:33 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> On 16/11/2022 07:17, kuroda.keis...@nttcom.co.jp wrote:
> >> The issue here is pg_rewind looks into control file to determine the
> >> soruce timeline, because the control file is not updated until the
> >> first checkpoint ends after p
hi Heikki,
Thanks to mail, and thanks also for the commit(0a0500207a)
to fix the document.
I'm glad the problem was solved.
Best Regards,
Keisuke Kuroda
NTT COMWARE
2023-02-27 16:33 に Heikki Linnakangas さんは書きました:
On 16/11/2022 07:17, kuroda.keis...@nttcom.co.jp wrote:
I fixed this last week i
On 16/11/2022 07:17, kuroda.keis...@nttcom.co.jp wrote:
The issue here is pg_rewind looks into control file to determine the
soruce timeline, because the control file is not updated until the
first checkpoint ends after promotion finishes, even though file
blocks are already diverged.
Even in th
Hi, hackers
The issue here is pg_rewind looks into control file to determine the
soruce timeline, because the control file is not updated until the
first checkpoint ends after promotion finishes, even though file
blocks are already diverged.
Even in that case history file for the new timeline i
At Tue, 5 Jul 2022 14:46:13 -0400, James Coleman wrote in
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 2:39 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 8:59 AM James Coleman wrote:
> > > A quick background refresher: after promoting a standby rewinding the
> > > former primary requires that a checkpoint h
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 2:47 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > Is there anything intrinsic to the mechanism of operation of pg_rewind
> > that requires a timeline change, or could we just rewind within the
> > same timeline to an earlier LSN? In other words, maybe we could just
> > remo
Robert Haas writes:
> Is there anything intrinsic to the mechanism of operation of pg_rewind
> that requires a timeline change, or could we just rewind within the
> same timeline to an earlier LSN? In other words, maybe we could just
> remove this limitation of pg_rewind, and then perhaps it would
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 2:39 PM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 8:59 AM James Coleman wrote:
> > A quick background refresher: after promoting a standby rewinding the
> > former primary requires that a checkpoint have been completed on the
> > new primary after promotion. This is cor
On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 8:59 AM James Coleman wrote:
> A quick background refresher: after promoting a standby rewinding the
> former primary requires that a checkpoint have been completed on the
> new primary after promotion. This is correctly documented. However
> pg_rewind incorrectly reports to
At Wed, 08 Jun 2022 18:15:09 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> At Tue, 07 Jun 2022 16:05:47 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote in
> > At Tue, 07 Jun 2022 12:39:38 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > wrote in
> > > One possible way to detect promotion reliably is to look into tim
At Tue, 07 Jun 2022 16:05:47 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> At Tue, 07 Jun 2022 12:39:38 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote in
> > One possible way to detect promotion reliably is to look into timeline
> > history files. It is written immediately at promotion even on
> > standb
I think this is a good improvement and also like the option (on pg_rewind) to
potentially send checkpoints to the source.
Personal anecdote. I was using stolon and frequently failing over. For sometime
the rewind was failing that it wasn't required. Only learnt that it's the
checkpoint on th
At Tue, 7 Jun 2022 16:16:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote
in
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 12:39:38PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > At Mon, 6 Jun 2022 08:32:01 -0400, James Coleman wrote
> > in
> >> To confirm I'm following you correctly, you're envisioning a situation
> >> like:
> >>
> >>
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 12:39:38PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Mon, 6 Jun 2022 08:32:01 -0400, James Coleman wrote in
>> To confirm I'm following you correctly, you're envisioning a situation like:
>>
>> - Primary A
>> - Replica B replicating from primary
>> - Replica C replicating from
At Tue, 07 Jun 2022 12:39:38 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote in
> One possible way to detect promotion reliably is to look into timeline
> history files. It is written immediately at promotion even on
> standbys.
The attached seems to work. It uses timeline history files to identify
the so
At Mon, 6 Jun 2022 08:32:01 -0400, James Coleman wrote in
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 1:26 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> wrote:
> >
> > At Sat, 4 Jun 2022 19:09:41 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
> > wrote in
> > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM James Coleman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > A few weeks back I sent a b
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 1:26 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi
wrote:
>
> At Sat, 4 Jun 2022 19:09:41 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
> wrote in
> > On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM James Coleman wrote:
> > >
> > > A few weeks back I sent a bug report [1] directly to the -bugs mailing
> > > list, and I haven't seen a
On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 9:39 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM James Coleman wrote:
> >
> > A few weeks back I sent a bug report [1] directly to the -bugs mailing
> > list, and I haven't seen any activity on it (maybe this is because I
> > emailed directly instead of u
At Sat, 4 Jun 2022 19:09:41 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy
wrote in
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM James Coleman wrote:
> >
> > A few weeks back I sent a bug report [1] directly to the -bugs mailing
> > list, and I haven't seen any activity on it (maybe this is because I
> > emailed directly instea
On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM James Coleman wrote:
>
> A few weeks back I sent a bug report [1] directly to the -bugs mailing
> list, and I haven't seen any activity on it (maybe this is because I
> emailed directly instead of using the form?), but I got some time to
> take a look and concluded t
A few weeks back I sent a bug report [1] directly to the -bugs mailing
list, and I haven't seen any activity on it (maybe this is because I
emailed directly instead of using the form?), but I got some time to
take a look and concluded that a first-level fix is pretty simple.
A quick background ref
21 matches
Mail list logo
