From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kevin Hale Boyes <kcboyes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kartyshov Ivan <i(dot)kartyshov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, euler(at)eulerto(dot)com, thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com, peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org, amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed |
Date: | 2024-08-06 05:36:03 |
Message-ID: | ZrG2Q38F_RpDlygJ@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 05:17:10AM +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> The 0001 patch is intended to improve this situation. Actually, it's
> not right to just put RecoveryInProgress() after
> GetXLogReplayRecPtr(), because more wal could be replayed between
> these calls. Instead we need to recheck GetXLogReplayRecPtr() after
> getting negative result of RecoveryInProgress() because WAL replay
> position couldn't get updated after.
> 0002 patch comprises fix for the header comment of WaitLSNSetLatches() function
> 0003 patch comprises tests for pg_wal_replay_wait() errors.
Before adding more tests, could it be possible to stabilize what's in
the tree? drongo has reported one failure with the recovery test
043_wal_replay_wait.pl introduced recently by 3c5db1d6b016:
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=drongo&dt=2024-08-05%2004%3A24%3A54
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-08-06 05:43:00 | Re: Remove support for old realpath() API |
Previous Message | shveta malik | 2024-08-06 04:54:18 | Re: Logical Replication of sequences |