On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:55:19 +0100, "Stéphane A. Schildknecht"
<stephane.schildknecht at postgresqlfr.org> wrote:
> Sebastien Lardiere a écrit :
>> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 13:55:42 +0100, Sebastien Lardiere
> <sebastien at lardiere.net> wrote:
>>>>> Shouldn't node 2 and/or 3 be forwarder if you want to use one of them
>>> as
>>>> a
>>>>> master ?
>>>> You're right, i enable forward for 2 and 3, and then failover work.
>>>>
>>
>> Ok, it work, and i understand why i've got some error :
>>
>> - I have to set all direct receiver with forward = yes
>>
>> - When I do failover, i have to wait before send "drop node" for remover
> the old master.
> 
> Did you have to explicitly drop the node ? Documentation says it is done
> on
> every subscriber by the failover command. (so does slonik source code).
> 
No, in fact, the old master was not dropped after the failover. I wait and
verify that the new scheme work, then send "drop node" .

>
>>
>> Perhaps somewhere in the documentation, it could be write that in case
> of failover, future master and direct receiver have to be set with forward
> = yes ?
>>
>
> It's explained here :
>
>
http://slony.info/adminguide/slony1-1.2.6/doc/adminguide/stmtsubscribeset.html
>
> In fact, it is said that you should turn it off if you are *certain* you
> will
> *never* fail or switch against that node.

Right, now i remember why i always set forward = yes in the past ...

thanks a lot

--
Sébastien