The message "The database system is starting up." does not indicate an error. The reason it is at the FATAL level is so that it will always make it to the log, regardless of the setting of log_min_messages
:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/runtime-config-logging.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-LOGGING-WHEN
After the rsync, did you really run what you show?:
pgsql -c "select pg_stop_backup();";
Since there is, so far as I know, no pgsql
executable, that would leave the backup uncompleted, and the slave would never come out of recovery mode. On the other hand, maybe you really did run psql
, because otherwise I don't see how the slave would have logged such success messages as:
Log: consistent recovery state reached at 0/BF0000B0
and:
Log: streaming replication successfully connected to primary
Did you try connecting to the slave at this point? What happened?
The "Success. You can now start..." message you mention is generated by initdb
, which shouldn't be run as part of setting up a slave; so I think you may be confused about something there. I'm also concerned about these apparently conflicting statements:
The only ways I have restarted Postgres is through the service
postgresql-9.1 restart or /etc/init.d/postgresql-9.1 restart commands.
After I receive this error, I kill all processes and again try to
restart the database...
Did you try to stop the service through the service script? What happened? It might help in understanding the logs if you prefixed lines with more information. We use:
log_line_prefix = '[%m] %p %q<%u %d %r> '
The recovery.conf
script looks odd. Are you copying from the master's pg_xlog directory, the slave's active pg_xlog directory, or an archive directory?
The error is harmless but to get rid of it, I think you need to break this restore into two commands, as in:
dropdb -U postgres mydb && \
pg_restore --create --dbname=postgres --username=postgres pg_backup.dump
The --clean
option in pg_restore doesn't look like much but actually raises non-trivial problems.
For versions up to 9.1
The combination of --create
and --clean
in pg_restore options used to be an error in older PG versions (up to 9.1). There is indeed some contradiction between (quoting the 9.1 manpage):
--clean
Clean (drop) database objects before recreating them
and
--create
Create the database before restoring into it.
Because what's the point of cleaning inside a brand-new database?
Starting from version 9.2
The combination is now accepted and the doc says this (quoting the 9.3 manpage):
--clean
Clean (drop) database objects before recreating them. (This might generate some harmless error messages, if any objects were not present in the destination database.)
--create
Create the database before restoring into it. If --clean is also specified, drop and recreate the target database before connecting to it.
Now having both together leads to this kind of sequence during your restore:
DROP DATABASE mydb;
...
CREATE DATABASE mydb WITH TEMPLATE = template0... [other options]
...
CREATE SCHEMA public;
...
CREATE TABLE...
There is no DROP
for each individual object, only a DROP DATABASE
at the beginning. If not using --create
this would be the opposite.
Anyway this sequence raises the error of public
schema already existing because creating mydb
from template0
has imported it already (which is normal, it's the point of a template database).
I'm not sure why this case is not handled automatically by pg_restore
. Maybe this would cause undesirable side-effects when an admin decides to customize template0
and/or change the purpose of public
, even if we're not supposed to do that.
Best Answer
Try this: