From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_rewind: warn when checkpoint hasn't happened after promotion |
Date: | 2022-06-04 13:39:41 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACXtdvJKvdJyOJ4D5aVx-tkOW3isKwtuDLBKeS6pfXvH0g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 6:29 PM James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> A few weeks back I sent a bug report [1] directly to the -bugs mailing
> list, and I haven't seen any activity on it (maybe this is because I
> emailed directly instead of using the form?), but I got some time to
> take a look and concluded that a first-level fix is pretty simple.
>
> A quick background refresher: after promoting a standby rewinding the
> former primary requires that a checkpoint have been completed on the
> new primary after promotion. This is correctly documented. However
> pg_rewind incorrectly reports to the user that a rewind isn't
> necessary because the source and target are on the same timeline.
>
> Specifically, this happens when the control file on the newly promoted
> server looks like:
>
> Latest checkpoint's TimeLineID: 4
> Latest checkpoint's PrevTimeLineID: 4
> ...
> Min recovery ending loc's timeline: 5
>
> Attached is a patch that detects this condition and reports it as an
> error to the user.
>
> In the spirit of the new-ish "ensure shutdown" functionality I could
> imagine extending this to automatically issue a checkpoint when this
> situation is detected. I haven't started to code that up, however,
> wanting to first get buy-in on that.
>
> 1: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAAaqYe8b2DBbooTprY4v=BiZEd9qBqVLq+FD9j617eQFjk1KvQ@mail.gmail.com
Thanks. I had a quick look over the issue and patch - just a thought -
can't we let pg_rewind issue a checkpoint on the new primary instead
of erroring out, maybe optionally? It might sound too much, but helps
pg_rewind to be self-reliant i.e. avoiding external actor to detect
the error and issue checkpoint the new primary to be able to
successfully run pg_rewind on the pld primary and repair it to use it
as a new standby.
Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-06-04 14:13:46 | Re: [v15 beta] pg_upgrade failed if earlier executed with -c switch |
Previous Message | James Coleman | 2022-06-04 12:59:12 | pg_rewind: warn when checkpoint hasn't happened after promotion |