Re: [bug fix] Cascading standby cannot catch up and get stuck emitting the same message repeatedly

From: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Robert Haas' <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [bug fix] Cascading standby cannot catch up and get stuck emitting the same message repeatedly
Date: 2016-11-15 03:25:22
Message-ID: 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F640402@G01JPEXMBYT05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Robert Haas
> Let me try to be more clear. I will not commit this patch if it is not
> properly commented. I doubt that anyone else will, either.
>
> The fact that those code changes already exist in 9.4+ is not a reason to
> back-port them to earlier releases without a proper explanation of why we
> are doing it. Very possibly, we should also improve the comments in newer
> branches so that future authors don't reintroduce whatever bugs were fixed
> by these changes. But whether we do that or not, I am not going to commit
> uncommented patches to complex code in order to fix obscure bugs in
> 3+-year-old branches. I think that is a non-starter.
>

OK, although I'm not perfectly sure what to add as a comment, I added an example scenario as a comment because I thought a concrete situation helps to understand the existing two paragraphs. Is this good?

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa

Attachment Content-Type Size
cascading_standby_stuck_v2.patch application/octet-stream 7.5 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2016-11-15 03:57:25 Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-11-15 02:51:31 Re: Adding the optional clause 'AS' in CREATE TRIGGER