Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF6A264FE75 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:02:57 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 93546-05 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:02:54 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: delayed 00:19:22.695353 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from users.757.org (users.757.org [70.169.147.20]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5985964FD99 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:02:54 -0400 (AST) Received: by users.757.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 830B5A6DE; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:43:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by users.757.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8256EA6B8 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:43:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:43:34 -0500 (EST) From: ethan@757.org To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Question, WAL file sequence on standby database? Always starts at 00? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200811/111 X-Sequence-Number: 30765 Hello all, I've started to setup a standby database, following the good official documentation. I've got WAL files archiving, I've got scripts moving them to the standby, but no data in the standby. I triggered a backup on the primary, which worked fine. The WAL files appeared to be created. But on the standby system, I can see that it is always trying to read in the first file LOG: could not open file "pg_xlog/000000010000000000000000" (log file 0, segment 0): No such file or directory However, since I had the primary logging for a little while, the backup is in a different file (0000000100000004000000D4) I figure I'm missing something obvious, but googling around and searching the mailing list archive isn't yeilding anything related to this issue. My config is pretty straightforward, the recovery.conf file is identical to the proposed one in the official docs. I found that it's possible to force the primary to start over again but I can see this being problematic in the future and it doesn't seem clean. Any suggestions are welcome! Platform is 8.2 on CentOS. TIA - Ethan