From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Jehan Guillaume De Rorthais ioguix <ioguix(at)free(dot)fr> |
Subject: | Re: Non working timeout detection in logical worker |
Date: | 2019-10-18 05:47:13 |
Message-ID: | CAOBaU_Y-J=ht126dBypNW9nFNsVrzZBDBD7VdR8ajKYf7G6dJQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 7:32 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 08:00:15PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > Jehan-Guillaume (in Cc) reported me today a problem with logical
> > replication, where in case of network issue the walsender is correctly
> > terminating at the given wal_sender_timeout but the logical worker
> > kept waiting indefinitely.
> >
> > The issue is apparently a simple thinko, the timestamp of the last
> > received activity being unconditionally set at the beginning of the
> > main processing loop, making any reasonable timeout setting
> > ineffective. Trivial patch to fix the problem attached.
>
> Right, good catch. That's indeed incorrect. The current code would
> just keep resetting the timeout if walrcv_receive() returns 0 roughly
> once per NAPTIME_PER_CYCLE. The ping sent to the server once reaching
> half of wal_receiver_timeout was also broken because of that.
>
> In short, applied and back-patched down to 10.
Thanks Michael!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2019-10-18 05:55:30 | Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-10-18 05:32:15 | Re: Non working timeout detection in logical worker |