RE: [bug fix] Cascaded standby cannot start after a clean shutdown
От | Tsunakawa, Takayuki |
---|---|
Тема | RE: [bug fix] Cascaded standby cannot start after a clean shutdown |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F903D56@G01JPEXMBYT05 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [bug fix] Cascaded standby cannot start after a clean shutdown (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: [bug fix] Cascaded standby cannot start after a clean shutdown
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael@paquier.xyz] > Even with that, the resulting patch is sort of ugly... So it seems to me > that the conclusion to this thread is that there is no clear winner, and > that the problem is so unlikely to happen that it is not worth the performance > impact to zero all the WAL pages fetched. Still, the attached has the > advantage to not cause the startup process to fail suddendly because of > the allocation failure but to fail afterwards when validating the record's > contents, which has the disadvantage to allocate temporarily up to 1GB of > memory for some of the garbage, but that allocation is short-lived. So > that would switch the failure from a FATAL allocation failure taking down > Postgres to something which will fetching of new WAL records to be tried > again. > > All in all, that would be a win for the case reported on this thread. I'm sorry to be late to reply, and thanks for another patch. Honestly, I'm fine with either patch. I like your simpler and cleaner one that has no performance impact. But please notethat the allocation attempt could amount to nearly 1 GB. That can fail due to memory shortage, which leads to FATALerror (ereport(ERROR) results in FATAL in startup process), and cause standby to shut down. Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: