| From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Kyotaro Horiguchi" <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Is it correct to update db state in control file as "shutting down" during end-of-recovery checkpoint? |
| Date: | 2021-12-08 17:32:22 |
| Message-ID: | F409B30E-86EB-46FD-844A-FD6605A480EB@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/8/21, 3:29 AM, "Bharath Rupireddy" <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks for your thoughts. I'm fine either way, hence attaching two
> patches here with and I will leave it for the committer 's choice.
> 1) v1-0001-Add-DB_IN_END_OF_RECOVERY_CHECKPOINT-state-for-co.patch --
> adds new db state DB_IN_END_OF_RECOVERY_CHECKPOINT for control file.
> 2) v1-0001-Skip-control-file-db-state-updation-during-end-of.patch --
> just skips setting db state to DB_SHUTDOWNING and DB_SHUTDOWNED in
> case of end-of-recovery checkpoint so that the state will be
> DB_IN_CRASH_RECOVERY which then changes to DB_IN_PRODUCTION.
I've bumped this one to ready-for-committer. For the record, my
preference is the second patch (for the reasons discussed upthread).
Both patches might benefit from a small comment or two, too.
Nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2021-12-08 17:34:21 | Re: Allow escape in application_name |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-12-08 17:31:00 | Re: Readd use of TAP subtests |