Re: recovery testing for beta

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: recovery testing for beta
Date: 2014-05-29 19:56:14
Message-ID: 15952.1401393374@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Jeff Janes wrote:
>> One thing is that I want to find a way to drive multixact in fast forward,
>> so that the freezing cycle gets a good workout. Currently I can't consume
>> enough of them to make them wrap around within the time frame of a test.

> IIRC I lobotomized it up by removing the XLogInsert() call. That allows
> you to generate large amounts of multixacts quickly. In my laptop this
> was able to do four or five wraparound cycles in two-three hours or so,
> using the "burn multixact" utility here:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20131231035913.GU22570@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org

Another possibility is to use pg_resetxlog to manually advance the
multixact counter to a point near wraparound. I think you have to
manually create appropriate slru segment files as well when doing that
(someday we should hack pg_resetxlog to do that for you). Still, it
might beat waiting hours to burn multixacts one by one.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2014-05-29 20:06:29 Re: Odd uuid-ossp behavior on smew and shearwater
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-05-29 19:51:38 Re: SP-GiST bug.