Hi Daniele, please keep the bug report CC´d, somebody else might be able to help you better than me.
On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 12:55:56PM +0000, Daniele Paolo wrote: > > You run etcd on the local nodes apparantly, right? > Yes Ok. > > You only attached logs for one of the machines (vdn-pg-t11), right? Can you > > also attach the ones for the other? > Ok in attachments Thanks. However, logs_vdn-pg-t12/logs/after_update/postgresql-Mon.log just seems to be the beginning of logs_vdn-pg-t11/logs/after_update/postgresql-Mon.log, so there are still no logs from logs_vdn-pg-t12 it seems. > > Which sounds like an etcd problem. Did you try to install etcd-client and > > run the following: > > etcdctl member list -w table [...] That all looks fine. Looking at the logs, the upgrade was at or shortly before 2025-10-30 09:27:20,725 (first log line in logs_vdn-pg-t11/logs/after_update/patroni.log) , is that right? logs_vdn-pg-t11/logs/after_update/postgresql-Mon.log already shows unhealthy replication a week ago: |2025-10-27 08:51:06.332 CET - 1 - 1844 - 148.196.186.107 - replicator@[unknown] - 0ERROR: requested starting point 6C/99000000 is ahead of the WAL flush position of this server 6C/98000218 |2025-10-27 08:51:06.332 CET - 2 - 1844 - 148.196.186.107 - replicator@[unknown] - 0STATEMENT: START_REPLICATION SLOT "vdn_pg_t12" 6C/99000000 TIMELINE 40 As the logs are still incomplete (there are also no patroni logs from vdn-pg-t12), I can't say what the problem is, but it might be that the replication (and also archiving) was already somewhat bad before the upgrade. Michael
