| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and logical replication[ |
| Date: | 2023-11-14 03:54:16 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JngEayzHaxfDM8LbOUL3=tBE47oq_NPaJ+xJJ9Xs1wDQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 5:52 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:02:27PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 1:52 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> >> It seems to me that INIT cannot be relied on for a similar reason.
> >> This state would be set for a new relation in
> >> LogicalRepSyncTableStart(), and the relation would still be in INIT
> >> state when creating the slot via walrcv_create_slot() in a second
> >> transaction started a bit later.
> >
> > Before creating a slot, we changed the state to DATASYNC.
>
> Still, playing the devil's advocate, couldn't it be possible that a
> server crashes just after the slot got created, then restarts with
> max_logical_replication_workers=0? This would keep the catalog in a
> state authorized by the upgrade,
>
The state should be DATASYNC by that time and I don't think that is an
authorized state by upgrade.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-11-14 03:54:39 | typo in fallback implementation for pg_atomic_test_set_flag() |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-11-14 03:42:29 | Re: Is this a problem in GenericXLogFinish()? |