Re: IPC/MultixactCreation on the Standby server

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
To: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Cc: Ivan Bykov <i(dot)bykov(at)modernsys(dot)ru>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: IPC/MultixactCreation on the Standby server
Date: 2025-11-27 07:20:24
Message-ID: ebacc906-9e02-4c86-ac25-7d2f3a929ffd@iki.fi
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 26/11/2025 23:15, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2025-11-26, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> What happens if you replay the WAL generated with old binary, without
>> this patch, with new binary? It's not good:
>
> Maybe this needs a new record identifier, separating old wal from that generated by the new code?

One downside of that is that the new WAL record type would be unreadable
by older versions. We recommend upgrading standbys before primary, but
it'd still be nicer if we could avoid that.

Maybe we can make RecordNewMultiXact() tolerate the missing page, in
this special case of replaying WAL and the multixid being at the page
boundary.

- Heikki

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2025-11-27 07:24:51 Re: IPC/MultixactCreation on the Standby server
Previous Message Chao Li 2025-11-27 06:56:02 Re: Row pattern recognition