On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:04:50PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
>> > +    While a Log-Shipping Standby Server (<xref linkend="warm-standby">) 
>> > can
>> > +    be upgraded, the server must be in changed to a primary server to 
>> > allow
>> > +    writes, and after the upgrade it cannot be reused as a standby server.
>> > +    (Running <command>rsync</> after the upgrade allows reuse.)
>> "in changed"?  This sentence makes no sense at all to me.
> Oops.  New wording attached with "in" removed:
>         the server must be changed to a primary server

Don't we normally talk about "must be promoted to a primary server",
not changed?

And wouldn't it be good if it also mentions that another good option
is to just pg_upgrade the master and rebuild the standby? (Unless
that's already mentioned somewhere else).

What's the actual usecase for promoting the slave, upgrading it and
then *not* using it, which is what I think this paragraph suggests?
And I think the sentence about running rsync is extremely vague - run
rsync where and how? What are you actually trying to suggest people

 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to