From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL |
Date: | 2010-02-10 09:19:01 |
Message-ID: | 3f0b79eb1002100119r6ce1b4b7haf2732d5fa8bbfa1@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Hmm, so after running restore_command, check the file size and if it's
> too short, treat it the same as if restore_command returned non-zero?
Yes, only in standby mode case. OTOH I think that normal archive recovery
should treat it as a FATAL error.
> And it will be retried on the next iteration. Works for me, though OTOH
> it will then fail to complain about a genuinely WAL file that's
> truncated for some reason. I guess there's no way around that, even if
> you have a script as restore_command that does the file size check, it
> will have the same problem.
Right. But the server in standby mode also needs to complain about that?
We might be able to read completely such a WAL file that looks truncated
from the primary via SR, or from the archive after a few seconds. So it's
odd for me to give up continuing the standby only by finding the WAL file
whose file size is short. I believe that the warm standby (+ pg_standby)
also is based on that thought.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2010-02-10 13:45:00 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-10 08:25:25 | pgsql: Now that streaming replication switches between streaming mode |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aidan Van Dyk | 2010-02-10 13:45:00 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-10 07:32:48 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kurt Harriman | 2010-02-10 09:26:56 | Re: Patch: Remove gcc dependency in definition of inline functions |
Previous Message | Leonardo F | 2010-02-10 09:11:40 | Re: I: About "Our CLUSTER implementation is pessimal" patch |