Re: [BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-10 Thread Tom Lane
Marc Schablewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Now everything seems to work fine, but we are still testing. At least > what we see in the logs is more reasonable. Now the .backup file is > requested first, then the WALs. There is one strange thing left, though. > The server first requests the secon

Re: [BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-10 Thread Marc Schablewski
Tom Lane wrote: > Marc Schablewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> cache_value is set to one for all sequences. As far as I can tell, they >> were all created by a plain CREATE SEQUENCE seq_name and no other >> settings changed. And as we found out later this "loss of information" >> hit some i

Re: [BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-09 Thread Tom Lane
Marc Schablewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > cache_value is set to one for all sequences. As far as I can tell, they > were all created by a plain CREATE SEQUENCE seq_name and no other > settings changed. And as we found out later this "loss of information" > hit some indexes as well. > We took

Re: [BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-09 Thread Marc Schablewski
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc Schablewski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> A job tried to insert some records into a few tables and complained about a >> PK violation. PK are of type bigint. The column is populated by a sequence >> and a "default nextval()" on the PK column. We found that the sequenc

Re: [BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-08 Thread Tom Lane
"Marc Schablewski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A job tried to insert some records into a few tables and complained about a > PK violation. PK are of type bigint. The column is populated by a sequence > and a "default nextval()" on the PK column. We found that the sequence's > currval was lower th

Re: [BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-08 Thread Marc Schablewski
FYI: We found another anomaly in that database (duplicated record with a unique index on a column (non PK)) and so we did some more research. As before, the record got replicated, but this time, the index entry was not. Later, a job tried to check if that record was already there by querying the co

[BUGS] BUG #4565: nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violations

2008-12-05 Thread Marc Schablewski
The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 4565 Logged by: Marc Schablewski Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PostgreSQL version: 8.3.5 Operating system: Debian, 2.6.24-19 kernel Description:nextval not updated during wal replication, leading to pk violat