| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Yu Shi (Fujitsu)" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: BF animal dikkop reported a failure in 035_standby_logical_decoding |
| Date: | 2023-05-30 15:24:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20230530152426.ensapay7pozh7ozn@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-05-29 14:31:24 +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> On 5/29/23 1:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > but I wouldn't be surprised if something in the logical replication
> > mechanism itself could be running a transaction at the wrong instant.
> >
> > Some of the other recovery tests set
> > autovacuum = off
> > to try to control such problems, but I'm not sure how much of
> > a solution that really is.
>
> One option I can think of is to:
>
> 1) set autovacuum = off (as it looks like the usual suspect).
> 2) trigger the vacuum in verbose mode (as suggested by Shi-san) and
> depending of its output run the "invalidation" test or: re-launch the vacuum, re-check the output
> and so on.. (n times max). If n is reached, then skip this test.
I think the best fix would be to wait for a new snapshot that has a newer
horizon, before doing the vacuum full.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | MARK CALLAGHAN | 2023-05-30 17:03:32 | Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16 |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2023-05-30 14:58:28 | Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node |