Hi, Pavan, On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Pavan Deolasee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Fujii Masao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> If the database whose timeline is the same as the primary's >> exists in the standby, 2)3) getting new online-backup is not >> necessary. For example, after the standby falls down, the >> database at that time is applicable to restart it. >> >> > > If I remember correctly, when postgres finishes its recovery, it > increments the timeline. If this is true, whenever ACT fails and SBY > becomes primary, SBY would increment its timeline. So when the former > ACT comes back and joins the replication as SBY, would it need to get > a fresh backup before it can join as SBY ?
PITR from not online backup is tricky in the first place. We might not be able to support the catch-up without a fresh online backup officially.. Furthermore, there is another problem. Please see the following mail. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-09/msg00964.php Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
