Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B056505E7 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:11:17 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86168-06-3 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:11:06 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mk-outboundfilter-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-outboundfilter-3.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.23]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E5E6505FB for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:10:36 -0300 (ADT) X-Trace: 143890818/mk-outboundfilter-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com/F2S/$F2S-NILDRAM-ACCEPTED/f2s-temporary-group/85.211.229.155 X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 85.211.229.155 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: simon@2ndquadrant.com X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhEBAEBvV0hV0+Wb/2dsb2JhbAAIrnw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,346,1212361200"; d="scan'208";a="143890818" X-IP-Direction: IN Received: from 85-211-229-155.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk (HELO [192.168.0.3]) ([85.211.229.155]) by smtp.f2s.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2008 18:10:22 +0100 Subject: Re: pitr standby on slave with skewed time From: Simon Riggs To: Tom Lane Cc: Robert Treat , pgsql-admin@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <6522.1215792939@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <200807111119.46117.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> <6522.1215792939@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:15:57 +0100 Message-Id: <1215796557.4051.1551.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.007 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=0.007 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200807/116 X-Sequence-Number: 29726 On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 12:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Treat writes: > > Was review a clients config/setup and ran across a pitr warm standby scenario > > where the master machine is set to the current time, but the slave's time is > > currently sitting back in the month of May. Outside of getting ntp setup on > > the machine, I am wondering if I need to do anything special with the > > postgresql setup, or if just setting the correct date on the machine is a > > safe enough operation that nothing else would need to be done (like re-doing > > the base backup). Any thoughts? > > AFAIR you should be all right ... PITR only looks at WAL indexes, not > file timestamps. WAL filenames, just in case anybody listening thinks "I didn't create an index on my WAL, should I?". This is so people that set their pg_xlog filesystem no file modification timestamps don't screw up their recovery. > The slave does watch the current time to decide when to do recovery > restartpoints, so if you were setting the clock *back* by a large amount > it might be wise to stop and restart the slave postmaster. Forward > should be no problem though. Yeh, you're good. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support