On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Kouber Saparev wrote:
> Do you mean to archive the WALs somewhere and then scp them with a cron
> job? I doubt it would be fast enough neither.
>
I haven't been paying attention to this thread, but this comment caught my
eye. I had a setup at a previous job where
On 06/04/2013 06:47 PM, Steve Crawford wrote:
> On 06/04/2013 04:53 AM, Kouber Saparev wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We are using the 9.1 built-in streaming replication.
>>
>> Recently our slave nodes fell behind because of an UPDATE statement. It
>> took about 3 minutes to execute, but it affected half a
On 06/04/2013 04:53 AM, Kouber Saparev wrote:
Hello,
We are using the 9.1 built-in streaming replication.
Recently our slave nodes fell behind because of an UPDATE statement. It
took about 3 minutes to execute, but it affected half a million records,
hence the replication broke with the "reques
Kouber Saparev wrote:
> We are using the 9.1 built-in streaming replication.
>
> Recently our slave nodes fell behind because of an UPDATE statement. It
> took about 3 minutes to execute, but it affected half a million records,
> hence the replication broke with the "requested WAL segment ... has
Hello,
We are using the 9.1 built-in streaming replication.
Recently our slave nodes fell behind because of an UPDATE statement. It
took about 3 minutes to execute, but it affected half a million records,
hence the replication broke with the "requested WAL segment ... has
already been removed" se
