From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: loss of transactions in streaming replication |
Date: | 2011-10-21 03:01:52 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobp=c7vwW3FdbsnTZeb9GVe88KXbYjy=7ED-CzMKKSoyw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:05 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> OK, so this is an artifact of the changes to make libpq communication
>> bidirectional. But I'm still confused about where the error is coming
>> from. In your OP, you wrote "In 9.2dev and 9.1, when walreceiver
>> detects an error while sending data to WAL stream, it always emits
>> ERROR even if there are data available in the receive buffer." So
>> that implied to me that this is only going to trigger if you have a
>> shutdown together with an awkwardly-timed error. But your scenario
>> for reproducing this problem doesn't seem to involve an error.
>
> Yes, my scenario doesn't cause any real error. My original description was
> misleading. The following would be closer to the truth:
>
> "In 9.2dev and 9.1, when walreceiver detects the termination of replication
> connection while sending data to WAL stream, it always emits ERROR
> even if there are data available in the receive buffer."
Ah, OK. I think I now agree that this is a bug and that we should fix
and back-patch.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-10-21 03:40:26 | funny lock mode in DropTrigger |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2011-10-21 01:51:01 | Re: loss of transactions in streaming replication |