From: | hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs mailing list <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WAL segments removed from primary despite the fact that logical replication slot needs it. |
Date: | 2022-10-19 11:11:06 |
Message-ID: | Y0/bSiDkYlhiSmOW@depesz.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 04:57:52PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 2:43 PM hubert depesz lubaczewski
> <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 10:35:17AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > Wal file has been removed. Please note that the file was, as shown earlier, still within "restart_lsn" as visibile on pg12/bionic.
> > > This is quite strange and I am not able to see the reason why this can
> > > happen. The only way to debug this problem that comes to mind is to
> > > add more LOGS around the code that removes the WAL files. For example,
> > > we can try to print the value of minimumslotLSN (keep) and logSegNo in
> > > KeepLogSeg().
> >
> > That would require changing pg sources, I think, recompiling, and
> > retrying?
> >
>
> Yes. BTW, are you on the latest release of pg12, if not then you can
> once check the release notes to see if there is any related bug fix in
> the later releases?
We're not. We're on 12.9, and there seem to be some wal-related changes
since then:
https://why-upgrade.depesz.com/show?from=12.9&to=12.12&keywords=wal*
will talk with responsible people about upgrading it, and then redoing
the test.
Best regards,
depesz
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-10-19 12:51:55 | Re: BUG #17651: Possible optimization for sort on not nullable field (indexed) |
Previous Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2022-10-19 11:09:46 | Re: WAL segments removed from primary despite the fact that logical replication slot needs it. |