Is there anyway we can avoid creating publication record from master to slave? I am trying to upgrade postgres version in standby by using pg_wal_replay_pause() still i could see records are comping up from master.
Related
my primary server is Postgresql-9.4 and the secondary server is Postgresql-13, I followed all the steps but while restarting the secondary server, I am facing the error "An old version of the database format was found. You need to dump and reload before using PostgreSQL 13." how I should resolve it.
You cannot have streaming replication between different PostgreSQL versions, and you cannot have logical replication with versions less than v10.
You will have to use trigger-based replication like with Slony-I.
Heroku has instructions on how to upgrade postgres database version.
At a high level it's the following:
provision a follower database (to follow primary db)
put app into maintenance mode (so no new db transactions)
upgrade follower
promote follower to primary
My question is - why is it recommended to upgrade the follower? Why not just upgrade the primary db? Then we wouldn't need to promote the follower either.
I can see it's useful to have the follower as a backup incase the upgrade fails but I'm not clear on why we upgrade and promote the follower.
I am very new to postgres and being new I got stuck at a point and need some help, please pardon if you find it silly.
I am doing a pgpool HA and at postgres level i have streaming replication between 3 nodes of postgresql-9.5 - 1 master and 2 slaves
I was trying to configure auto failover but when i switched back to my original master, and restarted the postgres service, I am getting the following error:
slave 1-highest timeline 1 of the primary is behind recovery timeline 11
slave 2-highest timeline 1 of the primary is behind recovery timeline 10
slave 3-highest timeline 1 of the primary is behind recovery timeline 3
I tried deleting pg_xlog files in slaves and copying all the files from master pg_xlog into the slaves and then did a rsync.
i also did a pg_rewind but it says:
target server needs to use either data checksums or wal_log_hints = on
(I have wal_log_hints = on set in postgresql.conf already)
I've tried doing a pg_basebackup but since the data base server in slaves are still starting up its not able to connect to the server
Is there any way to bring the master and the slave at a same timeline?
In my case, it happened because ( experimentally ), I updated the standby database tables and again when I simulate the master-standby streaming replication I got the same errors.
So once again I cleaned the whole standby database directory and migrate the master database using cmd like
"pg_basebackup -P -R -X stream -c fast -h 10.10.40.105 -U postgres -D standby/"
I think something is wrong in your pgpool configuration. What tool you have been using for manement of replication and master-slave control? Is it post master or repmgr?
I was trying to configure pgpool with 3 data nodes using a tutorial from http://jensd.be/591/linux/setup-a-redundant-postgresql-database-with-repmgr-and-pgpool and have done it correctly.
Also you can lean auto failover here.
(These question is obviously duplicate of this one, so I'll repeat the answer also.)
I'm not sure what you exactly mean by "when i switched back to my original master", but it looks that you are doing the wrongest possible thing in PostgreSQL streaming replication - introducing the second master.
The most important thing you should know about PostgreSQL replication is that once the failover is performed, you cannot simply "switch back to original master" - there's now a new master in cluster, and existence of two masters will make damage.
After a slave is promoted to master, the only way for you to re-join the old master is to:
Destroy it (delete the data directory);
Join it as a slave.
If you want it to be master again you'll continue with the following:
Let it run for awhile as a slave so that it can sync the data;
Kill temporary master and failover to old master;
Rejoin temporary master again as a slave.
You cannot simply switch master servers! Master can be created ONLY by failover (promoting a slave)
You should also know that whenever you are performing failover (whenever the master is changed), all slaves (except for the one that is promoted) need to be reconfigured to target the new master.
I suggest you reading this tutorial - it'll help.
Is there any way to Switchover the role of Master & Slave FREQUENTLY and synchronize Slave with Master and vice-verse?
Let see my network of machine goes off for 5 minutes on Master, then my Slave became the Master, but when my old Master network problem solved, then instead of building old Master with 'rsync' command, is there any possible way to synchronize old Master with only those changes made within 5 minutes?
Hoping for expert reply.
i have been working on postgresql replication right now
you have not give proper description about your problem
1) how you down the master killing postgres process or stop the master
there is no solution when master down using killing postgres except rsync because when master kill down master may have committed locally so there is inconsistency in data of master and slave due to master go ahead and slave left behind so next when old master try to came up as slave it will try to redo log at last checkpoint but it will not find that wal file from new master (old slave).
My company's website uses a PostgreSQL database. In our data center we have a master DB and a few read-only slave DB's, and we use Londiste for continuous replication between them.
I would like to setup another read-only slave DB for reporting purposes, and I'd like this slave to be in a remote location (outside the data center). This slave doesn't need to be 100% up-to-date. If it's up to 24 hours old, that's fine. Also, I'd like to minimize the load I'm putting on the master DB. Since our master DB is busy during the day and idle at night, I figure a good idea (if possible) is to get the reporting slave caught up once each night.
I'm thinking about using log shipping for this, as described on
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/continuous-archiving.html
My plan is:
Setup WAL archiving on the master DB
Produce a full DB snapshot and copy it to the remote location
Restore the DB and get it caught up
Go into steady state where:
DAYTIME -- the DB falls behind but people can query it
NIGHT -- I copy over the day's worth of WAL files and get the DB caught up
Note: the key here is that I only need to copy a full DB snapshot one time. Thereafter I should only have to copy a day's worth of WAL files in order to get the remote slave caught up again.
Since I haven't done log-shipping before I'd like some feedback / advice.
Will this work? Does PostgreSQL support this kind of repeated recovery?
Do you have other suggestions for how to set up a remote semi-fresh read-only slave?
thanks!
--S
Your plan should work.
As Charles says, warm standby is another possible solution. It's supported since 8.2 and has relatively low performance impact on the primary server.
Warm Standby is documented in the Manual: PostgreSQL 8.4 Warm Standby
The short procedure for configuring a
standby server is as follows. For full
details of each step, refer to
previous sections as noted.
Set up primary and standby systems as near identically as possible,
including two identical copies of
PostgreSQL at the same release level.
Set up continuous archiving from the primary to a WAL archive located
in a directory on the standby server.
Ensure that archive_mode,
archive_command and archive_timeout
are set appropriately on the primary
(see Section 24.3.1).
Make a base backup of the primary server (see Section 24.3.2), and load
this data onto the standby.
Begin recovery on the standby server from the local WAL archive,
using a recovery.conf that specifies a
restore_command that waits as
described previously (see Section
24.3.3).
To achieve only nightly syncs, your archive_command should exit with a non-zero exit status during daytime.
Additional Informations:
Postgres Wiki about Warm Standby
Blog Post Warm Standby Setup
9.0's built-in WAL streaming replication is designed to accomplish something that should meet your goals -- a warm or hot standby that can accept read-only queries. Have you considered using it, or are you stuck on 8.4 for now?
(Also, the upcoming 9.1 release is expected to include an updated/rewritten version of pg_basebackup, a tool for creating the initial backup point for a fresh slave.)
Update: PostgreSQL 9.1 will include the ability to pause and resume streaming replication with a simple function call on the slave.