From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Add a GUC check hook to ensure summarize_wal cannot be enabled when wal_level is minimal |
Date: | 2024-07-15 18:47:14 |
Message-ID: | ZpVushkGx0_nYIip@nathan |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:30:42PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 10:56 PM Fujii Masao
> <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
>> I don't think it's a rare scenario since summarize_wal can be enabled
>> after starting the server with wal_level=minimal. Therefore, I believe
>> such a configuration should be prohibited using a GUC check hook,
>> as my patch does.
>
> I guess I'm in the group of people who doesn't understand how this can
> possibly work. There's no guarantee about the order in which GUC check
> hooks are called, so you don't know if the value of the other variable
> has already been set to the final value or not, which seems like a
> fatal problem even if the code happens to work correctly as of today.
> Even if you have such a guarantee, you can't prohibit a configuration
> change at pg_ctl reload time: the server can refuse to start in case
> of an invalid configuration, but a running server can't decide to shut
> down or stop working at reload time.
My understanding is that the correctness of this GUC check hook depends on
wal_level being a PGC_POSTMASTER GUC. The check hook would always return
true during startup, and there'd be an additional cross-check in
PostmasterMain() that would fail startup if necessary. After that point,
we know that wal_level cannot change, so the GUC check hook for
summarize_wal can depend on wal_level. If it fails, my expectation would
be that the server would just ignore that change and continue.
--
nathan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Simpson | 2024-07-15 18:47:28 | filesystem full during vacuum - space recovery issues |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2024-07-15 18:34:38 | Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree |