From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Henry Hinze <henry(dot)hinze(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #16643: PG13 - Logical replication - initial startup never finishes and gets stuck in startup loop |
Date: | 2020-11-07 00:01:00 |
Message-ID: | 20201107000100.GA30839@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 2020-Nov-05, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 7:19 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-Nov-04, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:20 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> >
> > > > * STREAM COMMIT bug?
> > > > In apply_handle_stream_commit, we do CommitTransactionCommand, but
> > > > apparently in a tablesync worker we shouldn't do it.
> > >
> > > In the tablesync stage, we don't allow streaming. See pgoutput_startup
> > > where we disable streaming for the init phase. As far as I understand,
> > > for tablesync we create the initial slot during which streaming will
> > > be disabled then we will copy the table (here logical decoding won't
> > > be used) and then allow the apply worker to get any other data which
> > > is inserted in the meantime. Now, I might be missing something here
> > > but if you can explain it a bit more or share some test to show how we
> > > can reach here via tablesync worker then we can discuss the possible
> > > solution.
> >
> > Hmm, okay, that sounds like there would be no bug then. Maybe what we
> > need is just an assert in apply_handle_stream_commit that
> > !am_tablesync_worker(), as in the attached patch. Passes tests.
> >
>
> +1. But do we want to have this Assert only in stream_commit API or
> all stream APIs as well?
Well, the only reason I care about this is that apply_handle_commit
contains a comment that we must not do CommitTransactionCommand in the
syncworker case; so if you look at apply_handle_stream_commit and note
that it doesn't concern it about that, you become concerned that it
might be broken. I don't think the other routines handling the "stream"
thing have that issue.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-11-07 00:10:04 | Re: pg_dump error attempting to upgrade from PostgreSQL 10 to PostgreSQL 12 |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-11-06 20:51:28 | Re: BUG #16703: pg-dump fails to process recursive view definition |