Re: [GENERAL] Replication Monitoring

2007-12-07 Thread Chris Browne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Glyn Astill) writes: > [posted again as it found it's way into another thread] > > Hi people, > > I intend to set up two slave servers, one using WAL shipping and one > using Slony I. > > Are there any good tools, or scripts that'll help us check that both > replication methods a

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Monitoring

2007-12-07 Thread Glyn Astill
Ah thanks, thats what I must have done. Never happened on other lists so I assumed it'd be okay. My Bad. --- Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Glyn Astill wrote: > > How did that happen? The subject is totally different, so is the > > body. > > It has an "In-Reply-To:" and possibly "Ref

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Monitoring

2007-12-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Glyn Astill wrote: > How did that happen? The subject is totally different, so is the > body. It has an "In-Reply-To:" and possibly "References:" header which relates it to the other thread. The solution is simple. Don't reply to an existing message when you want to post a new thread. Compose a

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Monitoring

2007-12-06 Thread Glyn Astill
How did that happen? The subject is totally different, so is the body. This is shit. --- Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Glyn Astill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi people, > > > > I intend to set up two slave servers, one using WAL shipping and > one > > using Slony I. > > T

Re: [GENERAL] Replication Monitoring

2007-12-06 Thread Gregory Stark
"Glyn Astill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi people, > > I intend to set up two slave servers, one using WAL shipping and one > using Slony I. This has nothing to do with "aggregate and ordering" the subject of the message to which you're replying. You're more likely to see responses if you pos