Re: replication_slots usability issue

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: replication_slots usability issue
Date: 2018-10-29 19:13:04
Message-ID: 20181029191304.lbsmhshkyymhw22w@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2018-10-29 16:02:18 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Oct-29, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > -Hackers,
> >
> >
> > Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue where
> > the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there were stale
> > replication slots from a recent base backup. I went to drop the replication
> > slots and found that since the wal_level was set to minimal vs replica or
> > higher, I couldn't drop the replication slot. Clearly that makes sense for
> > creating a replication slot but it seems like an artificial limitation for
> > dropping them.
>
> This sounds closely related to
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180508143725.mn3ivlyvgpul6ovr%40alvherre.pgsql
> (commit a1f680d962ff) wherein we made it possible to drop a slot in
> single-user mode.
>
> Seems worth fixing. Send a patch?

I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check whether wal_level > minimal,
and doesn't. So you can create a slot, shutdown, change wal_level,
startup. A slot exists but won't work correctly.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-10-29 19:48:37 Re: Should pg 11 use a lot more memory building an spgist index?
Previous Message chenhj 2018-10-29 19:04:20 Connections hang indefinitely while taking a gin index's LWLock buffer_content lock