From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com |
Cc: | petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots |
Date: | 2017-03-02 00:43:50 |
Message-ID: | 20170302.094350.259304249.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:17:43 -0500, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote in <dc7faead-61c4-402e-a6dc-534192833d77(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> On 2/27/17 23:27, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> >>> WARNING: restart LSN of replication slots is ignored by checkpoint
> >>> DETAIL: Some replication slots lose required WAL segnents to continue.
> > However this is dangerous as logical replication slot does not consider
> > it error when too old LSN is requested so we'd continue replication,
> > hiding data loss.
>
> In general, we would need a much more evident and strict way to discover
> when this condition is hit. Like a "full" column in
> pg_stat_replication_slot, and refusing connections to the slot until it
> is cleared.
Anyway, if preserving WAL to replicate has priority to the
master's health, this doesn't nothing by leaving
'max_wal_keep_segments' to 0.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2017-03-02 00:54:14 | Re: Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots |
Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2017-03-02 00:39:57 | Re: Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots |