| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Weird planner issue on a standby |
| Date: | 2022-10-12 05:03:51 |
| Message-ID: | 728144.1665551031@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> But since your customer recreated their standbys from scratch *after* that
> delete, all the nodes should have those hint bits set (Guillaume confirmed
> off-list that they used a fresh BASE_BACKUP). Note that Guillaume also
> confirmed off-list that the customer has checksums enabled, which means that
> MarkBufferDirtyHint() should be guaranteed to mark the buffers as dirty, so I'm
> out of ideas to explain the different behavior on standbys.
Do we propagate visibility-map bits to standbys?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2022-10-12 06:07:51 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |
| Previous Message | Ron | 2022-10-12 04:07:50 | Re: Weird planner issue on a standby |