From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Nick Cleaton <nick(at)cleaton(dot)net>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: streaming replication master can fail to shut down |
Date: | 2016-04-29 07:16:58 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEwx3yLvVNGb0TdqVLEbFwOvu7UUKncYfJJFNRF6jH3C+Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Apr 29, 2016 05:38, "Andres Freund" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> On 2016-04-28 20:04:21 +0100, Nick Cleaton wrote:
> > On 28 April 2016 at 19:14, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > >
> > >> in this test the server sent only 29 keepalives during the shutdown:
> > >> http://nick.cleaton.net/protodump-100k-nossl-patched.xz (47k)
> > >
> > > I guess you have a fair amount of WAL traffic, and the receiver was
> > > behind a good bit?
> >
> > No, IIRC this was on the test cluster that I installed for the purpose
> > of replicating the problem under 9.5; it was essentially idle.
>
> The reason I'm asking is that I so far can't really replicate the issue
> so far. It's pretty clear that waiting_for_ping_response = true; is
> needed, but I'm suspicious that that's not all.
>
> Was your standby on a separate machine? What kind of latency?
>
I had no problem reproducing it on my mostly idle laptop. Not enough to
make a proper slowdown, but if I instrumented the receiver it saw the
multiple packets every single time.
/Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2016-04-29 07:22:18 | Re: [BUGS] Breakage with VACUUM ANALYSE + partitions |
Previous Message | Nick Cleaton | 2016-04-29 07:05:51 | Re: streaming replication master can fail to shut down |