Re: Bug in ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo for snapshots crossing 4B, breaking replicas

From: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug in ProcArrayApplyRecoveryInfo for snapshots crossing 4B, breaking replicas
Date: 2022-01-27 19:33:46
Message-ID: 1b8b2841-a99c-75ca-10fb-73f2ed883013@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1/26/22 23:54, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 07:31:00PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> I actually tried doing that, but I was not very happy with the result. The
>> test has to call pg_resetwal, but then it also has to fake pg_xact data and
>> so on, which seemed a bit ugly so did not include the test in the patch.
>
> Indeed, the dependency to /dev/zero is not good either. The patch
> logic looks good to me.

OK, I've pushed the patch. We may consider adding a TAP test later, if
we find a reasonably clean approach.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-01-27 19:43:57 Re: pgsql: Server-side gzip compression.
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2022-01-27 19:32:04 Unlogged relations and WAL-logging