| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Joseph Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: clog_redo causing very long recovery time |
| Date: | 2011-05-06 03:29:13 |
| Message-ID: | 1304652497-sup-8224@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie may 06 00:22:43 -0300 2011:
> I think a more elegant fix might be to just swap the order of the
> ExtendCLOG and ExtendSUBTRANS calls in GetNewTransactionId. The
> reason that would help is that pg_subtrans isn't WAL-logged, so if
> we succeed doing ExtendSUBTRANS and then fail in ExtendCLOG, we
> won't have written any XLOG entry, and thus repeated failures will not
> result in repeated XLOG entries. I seem to recall having considered
> exactly that point when the clog WAL support was first done, but the
> scenario evidently wasn't considered when subtransactions were stuck
> in :-(.
I'm pretty sure it would have never occured to me to consider such a
scenario.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2011-05-06 03:41:10 | Re: clog_redo causing very long recovery time |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-05-06 03:22:43 | Re: clog_redo causing very long recovery time |