From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hot Standby 0.2.1 |
Date: | 2009-09-23 14:45:26 |
Message-ID: | 4ABA3486.1030609@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> 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.
Ah, scratch that, I now see that we do call
XactClearRecoveryTransactions() when we see a shutdown checkpoint, which
clears all recovery locks. But doesn't that prematurely clear all locks
belonging to prepared transactions as well?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christian Ullrich | 2009-09-23 14:51:15 | Re: Getting the red out (of the buildfarm) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-23 14:20:22 | Getting the red out (of the buildfarm) |