On 2017-05-31 21:27:56 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Craig, > > * Craig Ringer (cr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > > TL;DR: replication origins track LSN without timeline. This is > > ambiguous when physical failover is present since XXXXXXXX/XXXXXXXX > > can now represent more than one state due to timeline forks with > > promotions. Replication origins should track timelines so we can tell > > the difference, I propose to patch them accordingly for pg11. > > Uh, TL;DR, wow? Why isn't this something which needs to be addressed > before PG10 can be released?
Huh? Slots are't present on replicas, ergo there's no way for the whole issue to occur in v10. > The further comments in your email seem to state that logical > replication will just fail if a replica is promoted. While not ideal, > that might barely reach the point of it being releasable, but turns it > into a feature that I'd have a really hard time recommending to > anyone, Meh^10 > and are we absolutely sure that there aren't any cases where there might > be an issue of undetected promotion, leading to the complications which > you describe? Yes, unless you manipulate things by hand, copying files around or such. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
