| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] pg_basebackup from disconnected standby fails |
| Date: | 2016-10-26 17:59:31 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaFO669fZv7B5Qn03Z-iLpuw8oAvEM9fmVTDZmsgrnd3g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> But yes, thinking *harder*, I agree that updating minRecoveryPoint
> just after the checkpoint record would be fine and removes the need to
> have more WAL than necessary in for a backup taken from a standby.
> That will also prevent cases where minRecoveryPoint is older than the
> recovery start point. On top of that the cost of an extra call to
> UpdateControlFile() looks cheap considering that CreateRestartPoint()
> is called only by the checkpointer or at shutdown.
>
> Just coding things this solution gives roughtly the attached? The TAP
> test passes btw.
I think that still leaves a race condition, right? It's got to be
part of the SAME control file update that advances the redo pointer.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-10-26 18:04:55 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2016-10-26 17:57:22 | Re: emergency outage requiring database restart |