From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fix assert failure when decoding XLOG_PARAMETER_CHANGE on primary |
Date: | 2025-02-06 18:41:20 |
Message-ID: | CAD21AoB7dEH+KW97hcqf3J40tDf7cJzpi5T-zd0C7Ox-eeXvQg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 10:17 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 12:30 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I've updated the patch accordingly.
> >
>
> Today, again thinking about the proposed fix, I was wondering about
> the following case. Say, on hot_standby, the user created a logical
> slot, then shut down hot_standby, turn off the hot_standby flag, and
> restart standby. This is allowed today but not after the patch. It is
> possible that the user can promote a non-hot_standby server after its
> restart in the previous step and can reuse the logical slot. So, is it
> okay to change this behavior? If not, then we may need to go back to
> the first fix proposed by you in this thread.
While non hot standby, no one can advance logical slots, meaning the
standby server ends up accumulating WAL records and also causing the
bloat on the primary if hot_standby_feedback is enabled. Given this
outcome, I though that the current patch approach would be reasonable.
On the other hand, as you pointed out, it would not be good in terms
of compatibility as we end up limiting potentially existing use cases.
And it would be prefectly fine if users promote the standby server
shortly after starting up with hot_standby = off. But, similarly, is
there any concerns of my proposed fix?
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2025-02-06 18:48:10 | Re: Adjusting hash join memory limit to handle batch explosion |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-02-06 18:18:56 | Re: new commitfest transition guidance |