Thu Jun 3 14:55:52 PDT 2010
- Previous message: [Slony1-bugs] [Bug 69] Upgrade from 1.2 to 2.0 didn't work...
- Next message: [Slony1-bugs] [Bug 129] FAILOVER command does not update sl_subscriber
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
http://www.slony.info/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=129 --- Comment #1 from Steve Singer <ssinger at ca.afilias.info> 2010-06-03 14:55:52 PDT --- What I think is happening is as follows If more than one node is a direct subscriber of the node being failed over then slonik will find the node with the most recent sync and call failedNode2() on it. failedNode2() will post an ACCEPT SET event which will have to propogate for the failover to finish. If you do a failover(.....) slonik will finish before the ACCEPT SET event is processed. but if you do a failover(....) wait for event (......) and there isn't more than one direct subscriber then failedNode2() doesn't get called an no ACCEPT SET event is posted. further more the wait for event() will fail because there is no event to wait for. I think the solution from a slonik scripting point of view is to do failover(....) sync(id=new_origin) wait for event(....) the sync will ensure there is always an event to wait for. This seems a bit convoluted though and isn't documented clearly. I wonder if we can make this simpler somehow -- Configure bugmail: http://www.slony.info/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
- Previous message: [Slony1-bugs] [Bug 69] Upgrade from 1.2 to 2.0 didn't work...
- Next message: [Slony1-bugs] [Bug 129] FAILOVER command does not update sl_subscriber
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-bugs mailing list