On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Casey Duncan wrote:

>
> Nope the slave did not get the DDL (or at least it was not successfully 
> committed).
>
> On my dev server, I was able to reproduce the same failure even with the slon 
> daemons still running, so I think that pops a hole in theory that not having 
> slon running is the culprit (which is fine w/me btw since that's a 
> non-starter for us). Interestingly data changes made in the upgrade script 
> *did* propagate to the secondary.
>

Did slonik report any errors when you submitted the DDL changes?  If so, what 
were they?  Can you find the errors regarding the DDL change in your slon 
and/or postgres logs?

-- 
Jeff Frost, Owner 	<jeff at frostconsultingllc.com>
Frost Consulting, LLC 	http://www.frostconsultingllc.com/
Phone: 650-780-7908	FAX: 650-649-1954