From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hot Standby 0.2.1 |
Date: | 2009-09-23 11:36:02 |
Message-ID: | 4ABA0822.1030905@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 11:13 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I note that we don't emit RunningXacts after a shutdown checkpoint. So
>> if recovery starts at a shutdown checkpoint, we don't let read-only
>> backends in until the first online checkpoint. Could we treat a shutdown
>> checkpoint as a snapshot with no transactions running? Or do prepared
>> transactions screw that up?
>
> We could, but I see no requirement for starting HS from a backup taken
> on a shutdown database. It's just another special case to test and since
> we already have significant number of important test cases I'd say add
> this later.
There's also a related issue that if a backend holding
AccessExclusiveLock crashes without writing an abort WAL record, the
lock is never released in the standby. We handle the expiration of xids
at replay of running-xacts records, but AFAICS we don't do that for locks.
It shouldn't be much code to clear those states at shutdown checkpoint,
just a few lines to call the right functions methinks.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-09-23 12:10:16 | Re: operator exclusion constraints [was: generalized index constraints] |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-09-23 11:21:31 | recovery is stuck when children are not processing SIGQUIT from previous crash |