Re: BUG #16643: PG13 - Logical replication - initial startup never finishes and gets stuck in startup loop

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: BUG #16643: PG13 - Logical replication - initial startup never finishes and gets stuck in startup loop
Дата
Msg-id 20201104134931.GA6515@alvherre.pgsql
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #16643: PG13 - Logical replication - initial startup never finishes and gets stuck in startup loop  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: BUG #16643: PG13 - Logical replication - initial startup never finishes and gets stuck in startup loop  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Re: BUG #16643: PG13 - Logical replication - initial startup never finishes and gets stuck in startup loop  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-bugs
On 2020-Nov-04, Amit Kapila wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:20 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:

> > * STREAM COMMIT bug?
> >   In apply_handle_stream_commit, we do CommitTransactionCommand, but
> >   apparently in a tablesync worker we shouldn't do it.
> 
> In the tablesync stage, we don't allow streaming. See pgoutput_startup
> where we disable streaming for the init phase. As far as I understand,
> for tablesync we create the initial slot during which streaming will
> be disabled then we will copy the table (here logical decoding won't
> be used) and then allow the apply worker to get any other data which
> is inserted in the meantime. Now, I might be missing something here
> but if you can explain it a bit more or share some test to show how we
> can reach here via tablesync worker then we can discuss the possible
> solution.

Hmm, okay, that sounds like there would be no bug then.  Maybe what we
need is just an assert in apply_handle_stream_commit that
!am_tablesync_worker(), as in the attached patch.  Passes tests.

Вложения

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: PG Bug reporting form
Дата:
Сообщение: BUG #16700: Child table dependency loss after moving out of and back into the inheritance tree
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #16700: Child table dependency loss after moving out of and back into the inheritance tree