Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Petr Jelinek
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots
Дата
Msg-id 33bcf803-4aa8-27b6-b6bd-4fb3ae950b19@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: [HACKERS] Restricting maximum keep segments by repslots  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 28/02/17 04:27, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Although replication slot is helpful to avoid unwanted WAL
> deletion, on the other hand it can cause a disastrous situation
> by keeping WAL segments without a limit. Removing the causal
> repslot will save this situation but it is not doable if the
> standby is active. We should do a rather complex and forcible
> steps to relieve the situation especially in an automatic
> manner. (As for me, specifically in an HA cluster.)
> 

I agree that that it should be possible to limit how much WAL slot keeps.

> This patch adds a GUC to put a limit to the number of segments
> that replication slots can keep. Hitting the limit during
> checkpoint shows a warining and the segments older than the limit
> are removed.
> 
>> WARNING:  restart LSN of replication slots is ignored by checkpoint
>> DETAIL:  Some replication slots lose required WAL segnents to continue.
> 

However this is dangerous as logical replication slot does not consider
it error when too old LSN is requested so we'd continue replication,
hiding data loss.

--  Petr Jelinek                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Radix tree for character conversion
Следующее
От: 钱新林
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] help to identify the reason that extension's C function returns arrayget segmentation fault