From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Excessive CPU usage in StandbyReleaseLocks() |
Date: | 2018-06-19 17:01:08 |
Message-ID: | 20180619170108.zhywfuwnyexe3v2a@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-06-19 10:45:04 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 2:30 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > This should be a PANIC imo.
>
> -1. As a developer, I would prefer PANIC. But as an end-user, I
> would much rather have replay continue (with possible problems) than
> have it stopped cold in its tracks with absolutely nothing that I as
> the administrator can do to fix it. We should be building this
> product for end users.
Except that that just means the end-user will have an undebuggable
problem at their hand. Which will affect them as well.
And they could just restart with hot_standby=off, and restart again. Or
even just restart without the GUC change, because that will rebuild the
locking state from a later state / start becoming ready for query at a
later stage.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-06-19 17:05:48 | Re: Excessive CPU usage in StandbyReleaseLocks() |
Previous Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2018-06-19 17:00:36 | Re: Index Skip Scan |