From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz |
Cc: | jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [BUG] non archived WAL removed during production crash recovery |
Date: | 2020-04-23 05:05:46 |
Message-ID: | 20200423.140546.1055476118690602079.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs Postg스포츠 토토 결과SQL |
FWIW, the test for 10- looks fine, but I have one qustion.
+ 'archive success reported in pg_stat_archiver for WAL segment $segment_name_
This seems intending to show an actual segment name in the message,
but it is really shown as "... WAL segment $segment_name_1". Is that
intended?
At Thu, 23 Apr 2020 08:46:18 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote in
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 06:17:17PM +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> > I found an extra useless line of code in v9 patch. Please, find in
> > attachment v10. Sorry for this.
>
> Thanks for helping here, your changes make sense. This looks mostly
> fine to me except that part:
> +$standby1->poll_query_until('postgres',
> + qq{ SELECT pg_xlog_location_diff('$primary_lsn', pg_last_xlog_replay_location()) = 0 })
> + or die "Timed out while waiting for xlog replay";
> Here we should check if $primary_lsn is at least
> pg_last_xlog_replay_location(). Checking for an equality may stuck
> the test if more WAL gets replayed. For example you could have a
> concurrent autovacuum generating WAL.
Autovacuum is turned off in this case, but anyway other kinds of WAL
records can be generated.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2020-04-23 16:04:24 | BUG #16385: Postgres YUM repo broke |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2020-04-23 03:39:34 | Re: Backend stuck in tirigger.c:afterTriggerInvokeEvents forever |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Antonin Houska | 2020-04-23 05:08:02 | Re: More efficient RI checks - take 2 |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2020-04-23 04:57:55 | Re: [PATCH] Skip llvm bytecode generation if LLVM is missing |