From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: replication_slots usability issue |
Date: | 2018-10-30 17:52:54 |
Message-ID: | 20181030175254.wqircsg36vblpmw5@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > 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.
>
> It seems to me that what we are looking for is just to complain at
> startup if we find any slot data and if trying to start up with
> wal_level = minimal.
Right, we really should just call CheckSlotRequirements() before doing
so. I'll make it so, once I'm actually awake and had some coffee.
> Er... At the same time, shouldn't RestoreSlotFromDisk() *not* use PANIC
> if more slots are found in pg_replslot than max_replication_slots can
> handle. A FATAL is fine at startup, PANIC blows up a core file, which
> is clearly overdoing it if the goal is to give a recommendation at the
> end.
I can't get particularly excited about this. I guess we can change it,
but I'd only do so in master.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2018-10-30 18:02:04 | Re: replication_slots usability issue |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2018-10-30 17:22:52 | Re: Online verification of checksums |