Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nisha Moond <nisha(dot)moond412(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby
Date: 2024-02-22 11:05:19
Message-ID: Zdcqb3Ok+B/yOKrl@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 04:01:34PM +0530, shveta malik wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 3:44 PM Bertrand Drouvot
> <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Some random comments about v92_001 (Sorry if it has already been discussed
> > up-thread):
>
> Thanks for the feedback. The patch is pushed 15 minutes back.

Yeah, saw that after I send the comments ;-)

> I will
> prepare a top-up patch for your comments.

Thanks!

> > 4 ===
> >
> > + if (wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_LOGICAL)
> > + {
> > + ereport(ERROR,
> > + errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
> > + errmsg("slot synchronization requires wal_level >= \"logical\""));
> > + return false;
> > + }
> >
> > I think the return is not needed here as it won't be reached due to the "ERROR".
> > Or should we use "elevel" instead of "ERROR"?
>
> It was suggested to raise ERROR for wal_level validation, please see
> [1]. But yes, I will remove the return value.

Yeah, thanks, ERROR makes sense here.

> > 5 ===
> >
> > + * operate as a superuser. This is safe because the slot sync worker does
> > + * not interact with user tables, eliminating the risk of executing
> > + * arbitrary code within triggers.
> >
> > Right. I did not check but if we are using operators in our remote SPI calls
> > then it would be worth to ensure they are coming from the pg_catalog schema?
> > Using something like "OPERATOR(pg_catalog.=)" using "=" as an example.
>
> Can you please elaborate this one, I am not sure if I understood it.

Suppose that in synchronize_slots() the query would be:

const char *query = "SELECT slot_name, plugin, confirmed_flush_lsn,"
" restart_lsn, catalog_xmin, two_phase, failover,"
" database, conflict_reason"
" FROM pg_catalog.pg_replication_slots"
" WHERE failover and NOT temporary and 1 = 1";

Then my comment is to rewrite it to:

const char *query = "SELECT slot_name, plugin, confirmed_flush_lsn,"
" restart_lsn, catalog_xmin, two_phase, failover,"
" database, conflict_reason"
" FROM pg_catalog.pg_replication_slots"
" WHERE failover and NOT temporary and 1 OPERATOR(pg_catalog.=) 1";

to ensure the operator "=" is coming from the pg_catalog schema.

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jelte Fennema-Nio 2024-02-22 11:09:02 Re: When extended query protocol ends?
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2024-02-22 10:59:58 Re: bug report: some issues about pg_15_stable(8fa4a1ac61189efffb8b851ee77e1bc87360c445)