Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <osumi(dot)takamichi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <wangw(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Smith, Peter" <peters(at)fast(dot)au(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error
Date: 2022-03-09 06:02:21
Message-ID: CAA4eK1K989xCjgH=O_YBRwdmcwDY55rX8DnSym7GUSFGORj--A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 11:22 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 12:37 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 6:29 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > ---
> > > It might have already been discussed but the worker disables the
> > > subscription on an error but doesn't work for a fatal. Is that
> > > expected or should we handle that too?
> > >
> >
> > I am not too sure about handling FATALs with this feature because this
> > is mainly to aid in resolving conflicts due to various constraints. It
> > might be okay to retry in case of FATAL which is possibly due to some
> > system resource error. OTOH, if we see that it will be good to disable
> > for a FATAL error as well then I think we can use
> > PG_ENSURE_ERROR_CLEANUP construct. What do you think?
>
> I think that since FATAL raised by logical replication workers (e.g.,
> terminated by DDL or out of memory etc?) is normally not a repeatable
> error, it's reasonable to retry in this case.
>

Yeah, I think we can add a comment in the code for this so that future
readers know that this has been done deliberately.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2022-03-09 06:45:01 Re: Logical replication timeout problem
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2022-03-09 05:52:01 Re: Optionally automatically disable logical replication subscriptions on error