>> Sorry, I got the wrong idea about restoring data. >> To start as hot-standby needs restoring anytime, >> because Time-line ID of PostgreSQL is incremented. >> In addition, shutting down the PostgreSQL with "immediate" option causes >> inconsistent WAL between primary and hot-standby. >> >> So I think it's difficult to start slave automatically at demote. >> Still, do you think it's better to implement restoring ? > > I'm afraid it's not just better, but it's a must. We have to play by > Pacemaker's rules and that means that we have to properly implement > "demote" operation and that's switching from Master to Slave, not just > stopping Master. I do appreciate your efforts, but implementation has > to conform to Pacemaker standards, i.e. Master has to start where it's > configured in Pacemaker, not just where recovery.conf file exists. > Administrator has to be able to easily switch between node roles and > so on. > > I still need some more time to learn PostgreSQL data replication and > do some tests. Let's think if that's possible to implement real > Master/Slave in Pacemaker sense of things. >
Thank you for considering my proposal. I'll try to think another approach. Regards, Takatoshi MATSUO _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
