From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Unintended restart after recovery error |
Date: | 2014-11-12 16:07:25 |
Message-ID: | CAHGQGwHixg9SPS9qqbVQCeWQG=zY5Y0MzBa57KuNb_8aL=Mvuw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> While looking at postmaster.c:reaper(), one problematic case occurred to me.
>
>
> 1. Startup process signals PMSIGNAL_RECOVERY_STARTED.
>
> 2. Checkpointer process is forked and immediately dies.
>
> 3. reaper() catches this failure, calls HandleChildCrash() and thus sets
> FatalError to true.
>
> 4. Startup process exits with non-zero status code too - either due to SIGQUIT
> received from HandleChildCrash or due to some other failure of the startup
> process itself. However, FatalError is already set, because of the previous
> crash of the checkpointer. Thus reaper() does not set RecoveryError.
>
> 5. As RecoverError failed to be set to true, postmaster will try to restart
> the cluster, although it apparently should not.
Why shouldn't postmaster restart the cluster in that case?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-11-12 16:15:26 | Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches) |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-11-12 15:59:49 | Re: what does this mean: "running xacts with xcnt == 0" |