| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com, rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add checkpoint and redo LSN to LogCheckpointEnd log message |
| Date: | 2022-02-04 01:59:04 |
| Message-ID: | 7de7f720-666c-ea97-8926-7bc4c43f482a@oss.nttdata.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022/02/03 15:50, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> On way to take. In that case should we log something like
> "Restartpoint canceled" or something?
+1
> By the way, restart point should start only while recoverying, and at
> the timeof the start both checkpoint.redo and checkpoint LSN are
> already past. We shouldn't update minRecovery point after promotion,
> but is there any reason for not updating the checkPoint and
> checkPointCopy? If we update them after promotion, the
> which-LSN-to-show problem would be gone.
I tried to find the reason by reading the past discussion, but have not found that yet.
If we update checkpoint and REDO LSN at pg_control in that case, we also need to update min recovery point at pg_control? Otherwise the min recovery point at pg_control still indicates the old LSN that previous restart point set.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-02-04 02:08:03 | Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-02-04 01:51:31 | Re: fairywren is generating bogus BASE_BACKUP commands |