| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_rewind vs superuser |
| Date: | 2019-04-05 08:11:22 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEyc_4gLZSFDacsbC=Jy_-rEhM4zOd3Gr=7OdA3pBZAK2g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 10:06 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 09:59:29AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > A related question is, could we (for 12+) actually make the problem go
> > away? As in, can we detect the state and just have pg_rewind issue the
> > checkpoint as needed?
>
> I am not sure as you can still bump into the legit case where one is
> trying to rewind an instance which is on the same timeline as the
> source, and nothing should happen in this case.
>
If that is the case, would running a CHECKPOINT actually cause a problem?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2019-04-05 08:32:12 | Re: Protect syscache from bloating with negative cache entries |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-04-05 08:06:01 | Re: pg_rewind vs superuser |