| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Create replication slot in pg_basebackup if requested and not yet present |
| Date: | 2017-09-14 15:23:14 |
| Message-ID: | b3bc7385-15b8-88b7-fb62-5a93b0092952@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/12/17 16:39, Michael Banck wrote:
> We could split up the logic here and create the optional physical
> replication slot in the main connection and the temporary one in the WAL
> streamer connection, but this would keep any fragility around for
> (likely more frequently used) temporary replication slots. It would make
> the patch much smaller though if I revert touching temporary slots at
> all.
That's what I was thinking.
But:
If the race condition concern that Jeff was describing is indeed
correct, then the current use of temporary replication slots would be
equally affected. So I think either we already have a problem, or we
don't and then this patch wouldn't introduce a new one.
I don't know the details of this well enough.
Thoughts from others?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-14 15:26:34 | Re: A bug in mapping attributes in ATExecAttachPartition() |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-14 15:10:14 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use MINVALUE/MAXVALUE instead of UNBOUNDED for range partition b |