Re: Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication

From: Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
To: Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Subject: Re: Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication
Date: 2025-09-27 11:46:02
Message-ID: 655B3229-AA9B-4D18-9DF1-1A21FEAC515C@yandex-team.ru
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 26 Sep 2025, at 00:02, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Kindly let me know your thoughts.

What about crash recovery? Unflushed WAL might get overwritten after crash recovery. Primary must switch to new timeline to prevent problems, related to this situation.

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-09-27 13:30:29 Re: [PATCH] GROUP BY ALL
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-09-27 11:01:57 NLS in Meson