From: | jlrando <jose(dot)luis(dot)rando(dot)calvo(at)ericsson(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Hot standby 9.2.6 -> 9.2.6 PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages |
Date: | 2014-06-09 11:27:25 |
Message-ID: | 1402313245515-5806482.post@n5.nabble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
I am also facing this issue. I set up streaming replication for a PG 9.2.6
database in both master and slave. I have used pg_basebackup to dump master
database to slave. It took two hours to complete pg_basebackup. During this
time a lot of wal files were archived. As expected, when slave database
started up it went through archived wal files for 5 hours to catch the
master. During recovery from archived wal files appeared some warnings like
this:
...
Jun 6 14:55:50 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [177-1] [2014-06-06 14:55:50 CEST]
17024@ LOG: restored log file "000000010000066C000000E4" from archive
Jun 6 14:55:51 VNWID1-4 postgres[17032]: [1-1] [2014-06-06 14:55:51 CEST]
17032@ WARNING: xlog min recovery request 67B/B36ABD78 is past current
point 66C/E4FFFFE8
Jun 6 14:55:51 VNWID1-4 postgres[17032]: [1-2] [2014-06-06 14:55:51 CEST]
17032@ CONTEXT: writing block 0 of relation
pg_tblspc/16756/PG_9.2_201204301/16757/1116517382_vm
Jun 6 14:55:51 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [178-1] [2014-06-06 14:55:51 CEST]
17024@ LOG: restored log file "000000010000066C000000E5" from archive
...
It seems they are harmless and can be safely ignored, but I prefer to state
this in the post in case be relevant for any reason.
After 5 hours, slave database catched master database and streaming
replication started:
...
Jun 6 19:59:10 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [15763-1] [2014-06-06 19:59:10
CEST] 17024@ LOG: restored log file "00000001000006AA00000003" from
archive
Jun 6 19:59:11 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [15764-1] [2014-06-06 19:59:11
CEST] 17024@ LOG: unexpected pageaddr 6A7/CC000000 in log file 1706,
segment 4, offset 0
Jun 6 19:59:11 VNWID1-4 postgres[21691]: [2-1] [2014-06-06 19:59:11 CEST]
21691@ LOG: streaming replication successfully connected to primary
It seems that all is ok until now. And no other message was logged until the
crash. After some hours of replication being working properly, Postgres
stopped and log contains this:
Jun 7 17:52:45 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [15765-1] [2014-06-07 17:52:45
CEST] 17024@ WARNING: page 916 of relation
pg_tblspc/16756/PG_9.2_201204301/16757/402007830 is uninitialized
Jun 7 17:52:45 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [15765-2] [2014-06-07 17:52:45
CEST] 17024@ CONTEXT: xlog redo vacuum: rel 16756/16757/402007830; blk
917, lastBlockVacuumed 915
Jun 7 17:52:45 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [15766-1] [2014-06-07 17:52:45
CEST] 17024@ PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages
Jun 7 17:52:45 VNWID1-4 postgres[17024]: [15766-2] [2014-06-07 17:52:45
CEST] 17024@ CONTEXT: xlog redo vacuum: rel 16756/16757/402007830; blk
917, lastBlockVacuumed 915
Jun 7 17:52:45 VNWID1-4 postgres[17021]: [2-1] [2014-06-07 17:52:45 CEST]
17021@ LOG: startup process (PID 17024) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted
Jun 7 17:52:45 VNWID1-4 postgres[17021]: [3-1] [2014-06-07 17:52:45 CEST]
17021@ LOG: terminating any other active server processes
I think that this issue is exactly the same that is being discussed in this
thread and I have seen that a patch was released for this bug. Could anyone
tell me how to get / apply this patch?
Thanks in advace.
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Hot-standby-9-2-6-9-2-6-PANIC-WAL-contains-references-to-invalid-pages-tp5784147p5806482.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-06-09 12:41:27 | Re: Re: Hot standby 9.2.6 -> 9.2.6 PANIC: WAL contains references to invalid pages |
Previous Message | zhangzq | 2014-06-09 09:52:34 | Many processes blocked at ProcArrayLock! |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vik Fearing | 2014-06-09 11:42:22 | Re: "RETURNING PRIMARY KEY" syntax extension |
Previous Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2014-06-09 11:20:26 | Re: Allowing NOT IN to use ANTI joins |