Feedback-ID: i76984098:Fastmail
Message-ID: <fd5c6708-3791-4339-83a2-e5fc389cd9cb@aklaver.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2025 21:25:30 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Questions about the continuity of WAL archiving
To: px shi <spxlyy123@gmail.com>, pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
References: <CAAccyYKpNsQMD+S-A7a8YtDevFN0uRXkzg4tYWWBOFsv_jASNg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAccyYKpNsQMD+S-A7a8YtDevFN0uRXkzg4tYWWBOFsv_jASNg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/fd5c6708-3791-4339-83a2-e5fc389cd9cb%40aklaver.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 8/7/25 20:20, px shi wrote:
> Hi,
> There is a scenario: the current timeline of the PostgreSQL primary node 
> is 1, and the latest WAL file is 100. The standby node has also received 
> up to WAL file 100. However, the latest WAL file archived is only file 
> 80. If the primary node crashes at this point and the standby is 
> promoted to the new primary, archiving will resume from file 100 on 
> timeline 2. As a result, WAL files from 81 to 100 on timeline 1 will be 
> missing from the archive.

What are you planning to do with the archived files?

Also is not the case that once the primary crashes you are in a split 
brain case and can't really trust it's timeline anymore?


> Is there a good solution to prevent this situation?
> 
> Regards,
> Pixian Shi


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com