On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 05:20:52PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> ...
>
>which is not particularly great, I guess. There however seems to be
>something wrong, because with the prefetching I see this in the log:
>
>prefetch:
>2020-06-05 02:47:25.970 CEST 1591318045.970 [22961] LOG: recovery no
>longer prefetching: unexpected pageaddr 108/E8000000 in log segment
>0000000100000108000000FF, offset 0
>
>prefetch2:
>2020-06-05 15:29:23.895 CEST 1591363763.895 [26676] LOG: recovery no
>longer prefetching: unexpected pageaddr 108/E8000000 in log segment
>000000010000010900000001, offset 0
>
>Which seems pretty suspicious, but I have no idea what's wrong. I admit
>the archive/restore commands are a bit hacky, but I've only seen this
>with prefetching on the SATA storage, while all other cases seem to be
>just fine. I haven't seen in on NVME (which processes much more WAL).
>And the SATA baseline (no prefetching) also worked fine.
>
>Moreover, the pageaddr value is the same in both cases, but the WAL
>segments are different (but just one segment apart). Seems strange.
>
I suspected it might be due to a somewhat hackish restore_command that
prefetches some of the WAL segments, so I tried again with a much
simpler restore_command - essentially just:
restore_command = 'cp /archive/%f %p.tmp && mv %p.tmp %p'
which I think should be fine for testing purposes. And I got this:
LOG: recovery no longer prefetching: unexpected pageaddr 108/57000000
in log segment 0000000100000108000000FF, offset 0
LOG: restored log file "0000000100000108000000FF" from archive
which is the same segment as in the earlier examples, but with a
different pageaddr value. Of course, there's no such pageaddr in the WAL
segment (and recovery of that segment succeeds).
So I think there's something broken ...
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services