Re: Nicer error when connecting to standby with hot_standby=off

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Nicer error when connecting to standby with hot_standby=off
Date: 2020-03-10 00:06:55
Message-ID: 20200310000655.xud47fagckfodoqb@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2020-03-09 18:40:32 -0400, James Coleman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 6:28 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > > I wanted to get some initial feedback on the idea before writing a patch:
> > > does that seem like a reasonable change? Is it actually plausible to
> > > distinguish between this state and "still recovering" (i.e., when starting
> > > up a hot standby but initial recovery hasn't completed so it legitimately
> > > can't accept connections yet)? If so, should we include the possibility if
> > > hot_standby isn't on, just in case?
> >
> > Yes, it is feasible to distinguish those cases. And we should, if we're
> > going to change things around.
>
> I'll look into this hopefully soon, but it's helpful to know that it's
> possible. Is it basically along the lines of checking to see if the
> LSN is past the minimum recovery point?

No, I don't think that's the right approach. IIRC the startup process
(i.e. the one doing the WAL replay) signals postmaster once consistency
has been achieved. So you can just use that state.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2020-03-10 00:07:30 Re: Improve search for missing parent downlinks in amcheck
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-03-09 23:49:53 Re: Add absolute value to dict_int