Re: Network failure may prevent promotion

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Network failure may prevent promotion
Date: 2024-01-23 08:57:16
Message-ID: 9f8b1996-3a0a-479d-a676-1f0237f0d743@iki.fi
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 23/01/2024 06:23, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:29:10 -0800, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote in
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2024-01-19 12:28:05 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 03:42:28PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>> Given that commit 728f86fec6 that introduced this issue was not strictly
>>>> required, perhaps we should just revert it for v16.
>>>
>>> Is there a point in keeping 728f86fec6 as well on HEAD? That does not
>>> strike me as wise to keep that in the tree for now. If it needs to be
>>> reworked, looking at this problem from scratch would be a safer
>>> approach.
>>
>> IDK, I think we'll introduce this type of bug over and over if we don't fix it
>> properly.
>
> Just to clarify my position, I thought that 728f86fec6 was heading the
> right direction. Considering the current approach to signal handling
> in walreceiver, I believed that it would be better to further
> generalize in this direction rather than reverting. That's why I
> proposed that patch.

I reverted commit 728f86fec6 from REL_16_STABLE and master.

I agree it was the right direction, so let's develop a complete patch,
and re-apply it to master when we have the patch ready.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Zhilin 2024-01-23 08:59:00 Re: Shared detoast Datum proposal
Previous Message jian he 2024-01-23 08:51:55 Re: remaining sql/json patches