Re: [BUG] pg_basebackup from disconnected standby fails

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: [BUG] pg_basebackup from disconnected standby fails
Date: 2016-10-27 16:16:42
Message-ID: CA+Tgmob44oaYJFGAZ6qYsrXLJo55bofRdraF7X_7U31NNXqNcw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 7:16 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> This can create problem if the checkpoint record spans across multiple
>> segments, because you are updating minRecoveryPoint to start of
>> checkpoint record. We need to update it to end+1 of checkpoint
>> record. Please find attached patch which takes care of same.
>
> I gave up counting my mistakes on this thread, thanks. You should
> update the comments of XLogCtlData for the new field
> lastCheckPointEndPtr so as it is not used by the background writer but
> when creating a new restart point to define the minimum recovery
> point.

I committed and back-patched this with some additional work on the
comments, but I don't understand this remark. That comment seems like
it should refer to the checkpointer in modern branches, but isn't that
point independent of this patch?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2016-10-27 16:24:31 Re: Issues with building snap packages and psql
Previous Message Claudio Freire 2016-10-27 15:54:26 Re: CLUSTER, reform_and_rewrite_tuple(), and parallelism