nishi
-Original Message-
From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Fujii Masao
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:51 PM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: James Cowell; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [Solved] Corrupt indexes on slave when
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> James Cowell writes:
>> But pg_bulkload only puts the index updates into WAL if you also have
>>
>> archive_mode = on
>>
>> I guess it needs to test wal_level rather than archive mode now? It looks
>> like changes to the project have been minim
James Cowell writes:
> But pg_bulkload only puts the index updates into WAL if you also have
>
> archive_mode = on
>
> I guess it needs to test wal_level rather than archive mode now? It looks
> like changes to the project have been minimal for some time, which is a shame
> because it's a
is a shame
because it's a very useful tool.
Cheers,
James
From: Tom Lane
To: James Cowell
Cc: "pgsql-general@postgresql.org" ; Jeff Janes
; "w...@wdicc.com"
Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2013, 18:02
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [So
James Cowell writes:
> I enabled archive mode (which I didn't care about before as the database only
> holds 36 hours of data) and the indexes seem to replicate over fine. I
> suppose the problem here is lack of documentation, but at least the code is
> well commented :)
> It looks like pg_bu
I seem to have solved my problem, out of frustration I downloaded the source to
see what I could work out (although it's a good while since I did C) and I
found these comments in nbtsort-9.1.c:
* Formerly the index pages being built were kept in shared buffers, but
* that is of no value (sinc
