> Christopher Browne said:
>
>>  3.  Creating the node afresh, just like any new node
>>
>>      STORE NODE ();
>>      STORE PATH ();   ### to indicate how it is to communicate
>>      STORE LISTEN (); ### needful before version 1.1.0...
>>
>>  4.  Presumably, at this point, you already have replication sets
>>      operating, and just need to tell the new node to subscribe
>>      to them.
>>
>>      SUB**SCRIBE SET ();
>>
>> There appears to be some possible confusion if node #1 gets re-used;
>> it's not clear why, though some suspicion lies in the fact that Slonik
>> request often default to be passed via "node #1."
>>
>> I'd be inclined to set up any cluster I create to NOT have a node #1
>> as a result.
>
> I tried this as well, as a followup to my troubles from last night.  I
> don't have any node numbered 1 anywhere in my cluster, which has 1
> provides, 2 subscribers and no forwarders.  This is Slony 1.1 and
> PostgreSQL 7.4.
>
> The slonik commands all ran fine and the new node got the schema installed
> on it.  I then started the slon daemon for the new node.  This time I
> lowered the log level a bit and I saw the error.  The slon log contains:
>
> 2005-09-08 23:06:43 EDT [29532] DEBUG1 copy_set 1
> 2005-09-08 23:06:43 EDT [29532] DEBUG1 remoteWorkerThread_202: connected
> to provider DB
> 2005-09-08 23:06:43 EDT [29532] WARN   remoteWorkerThread_202:
> transactions earlier than XID 1177475 are still in progress
> 2005-09-08 23:06:43 EDT [29532] WARN   remoteWorkerThread_202: data copy
> for set 1 failed - sleep 60 seconds
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> 2005-09-08 23:11:43 EDT [29532] DEBUG1 copy_set 1
> 2005-09-08 23:11:43 EDT [29532] DEBUG1 remoteWorkerThread_202: connected
> to provider DB
> 2005-09-08 23:11:43 EDT [29532] WARN   remoteWorkerThread_202:
> transactions earlier than XID 1177475 are still in progress
> 2005-09-08 23:11:43 EDT [29532] WARN   remoteWorkerThread_202: data copy
> for set 1 failed - sleep 60 seconds
>
>
> It seems to think that there is a backlog of transactions it is waiting
> for, but I don't understand why, since the node is brand new.  Also, the
> XID does not change, so that seems to be an indication that no
> transactions are being processed.
>
> Can someone please tell me what I did wrong?

There's nothing "wrong" that you have done.

The problem is that Slony-I can't start until that old transaction that
may predate the installation of Slony-I components completes.

If you peek in at pg_locks and/or pg_stat_activity, you'll presumably see
that some transaction is under way (namely #1177475, though that number
may not be easy to see).

Kill that connection and the floodgates will open :-).