Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown

On Saturday, September 15, 2012 11:27 AM Fujii Masao wrote:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Amit kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, September 13, 2012 10:57 PM Fujii Masao
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 12, 2012 10:15 PM Fujii Masao
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>> The following bug has been logged on the website:

>>>> I would like to implement such feature for walreceiver, but there is one
>>>> confusion that whether to use
>>>> same configuration parameter(replication_timeout) for walrecevier as for
>>>> master or introduce a new
>>>> configuration parameter (receiver_replication_timeout).
>
>>>I like the latter. I believe some users want to set the different
>>>timeout values,
>>>for example, in the case where the master and standby servers are placed in
>>>the same room, but cascaded standby is placed in other continent.
>
>> Thank you for your suggestion. I have implemented as per your suggestion to have separate timeout parameter for walreceiver.
>> The main changes are:
>> 1. Introduce a new configuration parameter wal_receiver_replication_timeout for walreceiver.
>> 2. In function WalReceiverMain(), check if there is no communication till wal_receiver_replication_timeout, exit the walreceiver.
>> This is same as walsender functionality.
>
>> As this is a feature, So I am uploading the attached patch in coming CommitFest.
>
>> Suggestions/Comments?

> You also need to change walsender so that it periodically sends the heartbeat
> message, like walreceiver does each wal_receiver_status_interval. Otherwise,
> walreceiver will detect the timeout wrongly whenever there is no traffic in the
> master.

Doesn't current keepalive message from walsender will suffice that need?

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.