| From: | Ayush Tiwari <ayushtiwari(dot)slg01(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Clear FatalError earlier during crash restart |
| Date: | 2026-10-01 05:24:55 |
| Message-ID: | CAJTYsWUnNd9Dwqr6qqTYOe6wemOZ_39f=oUK3P_MucnwC8+iZw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Thu, 1 Oct 2026 at 09:48, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2026 at 07:53:12AM +0530, Ayush Tiwari wrote:
> > I've kept the helper, but now wait for the new checkpointer to install its
> > signal handlers. The helper gets more time too.
>
> Hmm. I am not sure that we actually need to multiply by 4 the restore
> timeout sent to the fake restore_command waiting for the shutdown.
> Isn't that somewhat betraying the default value of Utils.pm?
Ahh the 4x was just headroom for the setup waits.
> > You have a better feel for the backpatch risk here, so I'll defer to you..
>
> HEAD-only feels like better sleep for the time being woth v19 being
> close by. Better sleep sounds always good.
Sounds good.
> I have been doing a bunch of adjustments as of the attached, and that
> seems to work properly. The buildfarm would be the final judge; the
> CI looks OK with the new test at least. What do you think?
Thanks for this. The patch looks good to me.
I did multiple A/B testing and it works well.
Regards,
Ayush
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2026-10-01 05:24:58 | Re: Proposal: Conflict log history table for Logical Replication |
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2026-10-01 05:20:03 | Re: Report index currently being vacuumed in pg_stat_progress_vacuum |