Re: Is it correct to update db state in control file as "shutting down" during end-of-recovery checkpoint?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is it correct to update db state in control file as "shutting down" during end-of-recovery checkpoint?
Date: 2022-02-26 03:11:15
Message-ID: YhmaUxDMemv5hmba@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 01:09:53PM -0800, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> This one has been quiet for a while. Should we mark it as
> returned-with-feedback?

Yes, that's my feeling and I got cold feet about this change. This
patch would bring some extra visibility for something that's not
incorrect either on HEAD, as end-of-recovery checkpoints are the same
things as shutdown checkpoints. And there is an extra argument where
back-patching would become a bit more tricky in an area that's already
a lot sensitive.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2022-02-26 04:17:21 Re: why do hash index builds use smgrextend() for new splitpoint pages
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2022-02-26 02:54:07 Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats