Greetings,
* PO (gunnar.bl...@pro-open.de) wrote:
> Stephen Frost – Thu, 16. August 2018 19:00
> > * PO (gunnar.bl...@pro-open.de) wrote:
> > > - why does a recovery, based on a recovery.conf that points to a reachable
> > primary (which obviously communicates its own timeline), still look for
>
Stephen Frost – Thu, 16. August 2018 19:00
> Greetings,
I salute you, Stephen!
TL;DR: I blundered by not spotting an easter egg of my predecessors.
> * PO (gunnar.bl...@pro-open.de) wrote:
> > Consider the following scenario/setup:
> > - 4 DB servers in 2 DCs
> > - 1 primary (in DC1)
> > - 1 sy
Greetings,
* PO (gunnar.bl...@pro-open.de) wrote:
> Consider the following scenario/setup:
> - 4 DB servers in 2 DCs
> - 1 primary (in DC1)
> - 1 sync secondary (in other DC)
> - 2 async secondaries (distributed over DCs)
I'm a bit surprised that you're ok with the latency imposed by using
