Re: Hot standby fails if any backend crashes

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hot standby fails if any backend crashes
Date: 2012-02-04 16:05:15
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJ+S5X-Z6dsGsO_y6m_9LaJbuD98ed10Bj7LgRmUJjO8g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> I think saner behavior might only require this change:
>
>            /*
>             * Any unexpected exit (including FATAL exit) of the startup
>             * process is treated as a crash, except that we don't want to
>             * reinitialize.
>             */
>            if (!EXIT_STATUS_0(exitstatus))
>            {
> -               RecoveryError = true;
> +               if (!FatalError)
> +                   RecoveryError = true;
>                HandleChildCrash(pid, exitstatus,
>                                 _("startup process"));
>                continue;
>            }
>
> plus suitable comment adjustments of course.  Haven't tested this yet
> though.

Looks good, will test.

> It's a bit disturbing that nobody has reported this from the field yet.
> Seems to imply that hot standby isn't being used much.

There are many people I know using it in production for more than a year now.

Either they haven't seen it or they haven't reported it to us.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2012-02-04 16:11:43 Re: BUG #6425: Bus error in slot_deform_tuple
Previous Message Kohei KaiGai 2012-02-04 15:54:30 Re: [v9.2] sepgsql's DROP Permission checks