[Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От amul sul
Тема [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY
Дата
Msg-id CAAJ_b97KZzdJsffwRK7w0XU5HnXkcgKgTR69t8cOZztsyXjkQw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY  (tushar <tushar.ahuja@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY  (Soumyadeep Chakraborty <soumyadeep2007@gmail.com>)
Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi,

Attached patch proposes $Subject feature which forces the system into read-only
mode where insert write-ahead log will be prohibited until ALTER SYSTEM READ
WRITE executed.

The high-level goal is to make the availability/scale-out situation better.  The feature
will help HA setup where the master server needs to stop accepting WAL writes
immediately and kick out any transaction expecting WAL writes at the end, in case
of network down on master or replication connections failures.

For example, this feature allows for a controlled switchover without needing to shut
down the master. You can instead make the master read-only, wait until the standby
catches up, and then promote the standby. The master remains available for read
queries throughout, and also for WAL streaming, but without the possibility of any
new write transactions. After switchover is complete, the master can be shut down
and brought back up as a standby without needing to use pg_rewind. (Eventually, it
would be nice to be able to make the read-only master into a standby without having
to restart it, but that is a problem for another patch.)

This might also help in failover scenarios. For example, if you detect that the master
has lost network connectivity to the standby, you might make it read-only after 30 s,
and promote the standby after 60 s, so that you never have two writable masters at
the same time. In this case, there's still some split-brain, but it's still better than what
we have now.

Design:
----------
The proposed feature is built atop of super barrier mechanism commit[1] to coordinate
global state changes to all active backends.  Backends which executed
ALTER SYSTEM READ { ONLY | WRITE } command places request to checkpointer
process to change the requested WAL read/write state aka WAL prohibited and WAL
permitted state respectively.  When the checkpointer process sees the WAL prohibit
state change request, it emits a global barrier and waits until all backends that
participate in the ProcSignal absorbs it. Once it has done the WAL read/write state in
share memory and control file will be updated so that XLogInsertAllowed() returns
accordingly.

If there are open transactions that have acquired an XID, the sessions are killed
before the barrier is absorbed. They can't commit without writing WAL, and they
can't abort without writing WAL, either, so we must at least abort the transaction. We
don't necessarily need to kill the session, but it's hard to avoid in all cases because
(1) if there are subtransactions active, we need to force the top-level abort record to
be written immediately, but we can't really do that while keeping the subtransactions
on the transaction stack, and (2) if the session is idle, we also need the top-level abort
record to be written immediately, but can't send an error to the client until the next
command is issued without losing wire protocol synchronization. For now, we just use
FATAL to kill the session; maybe this can be improved in the future.

Open transactions that don't have an XID are not killed, but will get an ERROR if they
try to acquire an XID later, or if they try to write WAL without acquiring an XID (e.g. VACUUM).
To make that happen, the patch adds a new coding rule: a critical section that will write
WAL must be preceded by a call to CheckWALPermitted(), AssertWALPermitted(), or
AssertWALPermitted_HaveXID(). The latter variants are used when we know for certain
that inserting WAL here must be OK, either because we have an XID (we would have
been killed by a change to read-only if one had occurred) or for some other reason.

The ALTER SYSTEM READ WRITE command can be used to reverse the effects of
ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY. Both ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY and ALTER
SYSTEM READ WRITE update not only the shared memory state but also the control
file, so that changes survive a restart.

The transition between read-write and read-only is a pretty major transition, so we emit
log message for each successful execution of a ALTER SYSTEM READ {ONLY | WRITE}
command. Also, we have added a new GUC system_is_read_only which returns "on"
when the system is in WAL prohibited state or recovery.

Another part of the patch that quite uneasy and need a discussion is that when the
shutdown in the read-only state we do skip shutdown checkpoint and at a restart, first
startup recovery will be performed and latter the read-only state will be restored to
prohibit further WAL write irrespective of recovery checkpoint succeed or not. The
concern is here if this startup recovery checkpoint wasn't ok, then it will never happen
even if it's later put back into read-write mode. Thoughts?

Quick demo:
----------------
We have few active sessions, section 1 has performed some writes and stayed in the
idle state for some time, in between in session 2 where superuser successfully changed
system state in read-only via  ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY command which kills
session 1.  Any other backend who is trying to run write transactions thereafter will see
a read-only system error.

------------- SESSION 1  -------------
session_1=# BEGIN;
BEGIN
session_1=*# CREATE TABLE foo AS SELECT i FROM generate_series(1,5) i;
SELECT 5

------------- SESSION 2  -------------
session_2=# ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY;
ALTER SYSTEM

------------- SESSION 1  -------------
session_1=*# COMMIT;
FATAL:  system is now read only
HINT:  Cannot continue a transaction if it has performed writes while system is read only.
server closed the connection unexpectedly
This probably means the server terminated abnormally
before or while processing the request.
The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Succeeded.

------------- SESSION 3  -------------
session_3=# CREATE TABLE foo_bar (i int);
ERROR:  cannot execute CREATE TABLE in a read-only transaction

------------- SESSION 4  -------------
session_4=# CHECKPOINT;
ERROR:  system is now read only

System can put back to read-write mode by "ALTER SYSTEM READ WRITE" :

------------- SESSION 2  -------------
session_2=# ALTER SYSTEM READ WRITE;
ALTER SYSTEM

------------- SESSION 3  -------------
session_3=# CREATE TABLE foo_bar (i int);
CREATE TABLE

------------- SESSION 4  -------------
session_4=# CHECKPOINT;
CHECKPOINT


TODOs:
-----------
1. Documentation.

Attachments summary:
------------------------------
I tried to split the changes so that it can be easy to read and see the
incremental implementation.

0001: Patch by Robert, to add ability support error in global barrier absorption.
0002: Patch implement ALTER SYSTEM { READ | WRITE} syntax and psql tab
          completion support for it.
0003: A basic implementation where the system can accept $Subject command
         and change system to read-only by an emitting barrier.
0004: Patch does the enhancing where the backed execute $Subject command
          only and places a request to the checkpointer which is responsible to change
          the state by the emitting barrier. Also, store the state into the control file to
          make It persists across the server restarts.
0005: Patch tightens the check to prevent error in the critical section.
0006: Documentation - WIP

Credit:
-------
The feature is one of the part of Andres Frued's high-level design ideas for inbuilt
graceful failover for PostgreSQL. Feature implementation design by Robert Haas.
Initial patch by Amit Khandekar further works and improvement by me under Robert's
guidance includes this mail writeup as well.

Ref:
----
1] Global barrier commit # 16a4e4aecd47da7a6c4e1ebc20f6dd1a13f9133b

Thank you !

Regards,
Amul Sul
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: snowball ASCII stemmer configuration
Следующее
От: Dilip Kumar
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of largein-progress transactions