From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys |
Date: | 2019-05-23 13:16:34 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYN2ashonb57WcqCCs=DKwWAhjHZ84HJNhCX8Y-30TYBw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 8:08 AM Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This made me think more of the race conditions. For instance, in
> pg_create_logical_replication_slot(), just after
> CheckLogicalDecodingRequirements and before actually creating the
> slot, suppose concurrently Controlfile->wal_level is changed from
> logical to replica. So suppose a new slot does get created. Later the
> slot is read, so in pg_logical_slot_get_changes_guts(),
> CheckLogicalDecodingRequirements() is called where it checks
> ControlFile->wal_level value. But just before it does that,
> ControlFile->wal_level concurrently changes back to logical, because
> of replay of another param-change record. So this logical reader will
> think that the wal_level is sufficient, and will proceed to read the
> records, but those records are *before* the wal_level change, so these
> records don't have logical data.
>
> Do you think this is possible, or I am missing something?
wal_level is PGC_POSTMASTER.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2019-05-23 13:23:10 | Re: nitpick about poor style in MergeAttributes |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-05-23 13:14:59 | Re: [HACKERS] Unlogged tables cleanup |