I realize it's not iron-clad without understanding what's going on in the code, but...my tests today with another system and S3 bucket confirm the same behavior. Concurrency does not affect it. Here's what I did:
- created a new S3 bucket in Oregon - attempted the same backup as normal; it failed with the "[Errno 104] Connection reset by peer" error. - added the "-p 1" flag to the backup command; it failed in the same way - changed WALE_S3_PREFIX to point at another new S3 bucket, this time in "US Standard" - the backup worked (with and without the -p flag). Even if this discussion thread is findable on Google, I bet a lot of people are hitting this - who would think the choice of bucket region would matter? I was ready to accept that I couldn't use WAL-E at all until I heard this tip (which would be a shame, since it's a far better way to do replication than the out-of-the-box suggestions from Postgres). Dave On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Daniel Farina <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mar 13, 2014 11:18 PM, "David Weaver" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I was told, on a tip from a fellow engineer, to switch my S3 bucket from > the "Oregon" region (which I had been using) to the "US Standard" one. Sure > enough, that worked, and I no longer see the "[Errno 104] Connection reset > by peer" errors from my WAL-E operations. > > > > I don't think this is a CPU issue (as a medium-sized instance should be > plenty powerful for something like this), but one related to the S3 region. > At least in my case, this distinction was essential to my being able to use > WAL-E at all - perhaps it's worth at least a mention in the documentation? > > Fascinating. If you have copious free time I'd like to know if reducing > concurrency helps. > > As for putting it in the documentation: so far this seems too micro to > itemize given I don't have a way to organize such copious detail without > diluting top-line information. The causes and fixes aren't multiply > confirmed nor iron clad either. > > Fixing up the back trace to instead return a nice error with a HINT field > may be good, provided there was formulaic information for the hint. > > I think this mailing list archive will suffice for someone searching for > the error. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "wal-e" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
