Re: XMin Hot Standby Feedback patch

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: XMin Hot Standby Feedback patch
Date: 2011-02-16 07:27:59
Message-ID: 1297841279.1747.27059.camel@ebony
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 11:25 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 12:15 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> Looks pretty good to me, though I haven't tested it. I like some of
> >> the safety valves you put in there, but I don't understand this part
> >
> > Reworked logic covering all feedback, plus tests, plus docs.
> >
> > Last comments before commit please.
>
> When I started the standby with hot_standby = off and hot_standby_feedback = on,
> I got the following assertion error.
>
> -----------------
> sby LOG: streaming replication successfully connected to primary
> TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(((result) >= ((TransactionId) 3)))", File:
> "procarray.c", Line: 1027)
> act LOG: unexpected EOF on standby connection
> sby LOG: WAL receiver process (PID 17572) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted
> sby LOG: terminating any other active server processes
> -----------------

Thanks

> vacuum_defer_cleanup_age on the *standby* should not affect the
> feedback xid.

Not sure, will think some more.

> VACUUM TABLE on the *primary* doesn't use the feedback xid at all.
> Is this intentional?

Yes, I was in the middle of fixing that.

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Itagaki Takahiro 2011-02-16 07:48:33 Re: SQL/MED - file_fdw
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-02-16 06:55:30 Re: updated patch for foreach stmt