From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(TransactionIdPrecedesOrEquals |
Date: | 2017-12-20 05:27:03 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSLXiYV5iBxFF6teH=EKsQx9xFskswMVWWdfMmKL3L0rg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl> wrote:
> Sorry, that was probably too terse, I should explain that a little.
>
> After initing 50 instances, I set up and run a pgbench session in the master
> session; the pgbench lines are:
>
> init: pgbench --port=6515 --quiet --initialize --scale=1 postgres
> run: pgbench -M prepared -c 16 -j 8 -T 1 -P 1 -n postgres -- scale 1
>
> the other instances then catch up. The whole takes 5 minutes or so
>
> I vary scale, duration, and number of instances. I haven't had it fail in
> this way yet but I mostly tried with lower number of instances (up to 25 or
> so).
Hm. Are you saying that it takes at least 50 cascading instances to
see the problem you are seeing? And that you are not seeing any
problems with a lower number of cascading instances? Are you enabling
hot_standby_feedback?
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Huong Dangminh | 2017-12-20 05:28:39 | RE: User defined data types in Logical Replication |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-12-20 05:22:06 | Re: Add hint about replication slots when nearing wraparound |