From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <kyota(dot)horiguchi(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Failing start-up archive recovery at Standby mode in PG9.2.4 |
Date: | 2013-04-25 15:12:50 |
Message-ID: | 517947F2.7010904@vmware.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25.04.2013 17:55, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Hmm. I think that I caught the tail of the problem..
>
> Script with small change reproduced the situation for me.
Can you share the modified script, please?
> The latest standby uses 3 as its TLI after the history file
> 0..3.history which could get from the archive. So the WAL files
> recycled on this standby will have the TLI=3.
> Nevertheless the LSN of the segment recycled on standby is on the
> TLI=2 in the master, the standby makes the first request for each
> segment with that LSN but TLI = 3 to the master because the standby
> runs on recoveryTargetTLI=3. The master reasonably doesn't have it and
> finally the standby finds that wrong WAL file in its pg_xlog directory
> before the second request with TLI=2 would be made.
I'm not sure I understand what the problem is, though. When the standby
opens the bogus, recycled, file in pg_xlog, it will notice that the
header is incorrect, and retry reading the file from the archive.
> In conclusion, the standby should name the recycled WAL segment using
> the same TLI for the LSN on the master. Or should never recycle WAL
> files..
Perhaps, but it should nevertheless not get confused by recycled segments.
- Heikki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-04-25 15:19:52 | Re: putting a bgworker to rest |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2013-04-25 14:57:41 | Re: Proposal to add --single-row to psql |