On 5/27/2012 11:08 PM, Jan Nielsen wrote: > Hi Karl, > > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Karl Denninger <k...@denninger.net > <mailto:k...@denninger.net>> wrote: > > Here's what I'm trying to do in testing 9.2Beta1. > > The current configuration is a master and a hot standby at a > diverse location for both hot swap and "online" backup. Both are > archived regularly so if something goes south I can recover (to > either as a master.) > > > Okay > > > 1. Build 9.2Beta1; all fine. > > 2. Run a pg_basebackup from the current master machine (running > 9.1) to a new directory on the slave machine, using the 9.2Beta1 > pg_basebackup executable. > > 3. Run a pg_upgrade against that from the new binary directory, > producing a 9.2Beta1 data store. > > 4. Attempt to start the result as a SLAVE against the existing 9.1 > master. > > > Hmm - that's likely a problem: "In general, log shipping between > servers running different major PostgreSQL release levels is not > possible." [1] > > > Is this caused by the version mismatch? > > > Probably. Then the error message is wrong :-) > > > Do I need to run a complete parallel environment instead of trying > to attach a 9.2Beta1 slave to an existing 9.1 master? (and if so, > why doesn't the code complain about the mismatch instead of the > bogus WAL message?) > > > Slony [2] or PGBouncer+Londiste [3] should allow you to do this in an > integrated fashion. [4] > I ran Slony for quite a while before 9.x showed up; I could put it back into use for a while but I really like the integrated setup that exists now with 9.x.
I'll look at doing a parallel setup but it will more limited in what I can actually validate against in terms of workload than the above was workable... -- -- Karl Denninger /The Market Ticker ®/ <http://market-ticker.org> Cuda Systems LLC
