At Thu, 27 May 2021 12:47:30 +0530, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote in
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 12:09 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > At Thu, 27 May 2021 11:44:47 +0530, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote in
> > We're writing at the very beginning of the switching segment at the
> > promotion time. So it is guaranteed that the first segment of the
> > newer timline won't be archived until the rest almost 16MB in the
> > segment is consumed or someone explicitly causes a segment switch
> > (including archive timeout).
>
> I agree
>
> > > BTW, I have also tested your script and I found below log, which shows
> > > that standby2 is successfully able to select the timeline2 so it is
> > > not reproducing the issue. Am I missing something?
> >
> > standby_2? My last one 026_timeline_issue_2.pl doesn't use that name
> > and uses "standby_1 and "cascade". In the ealier ones, standby_4 and
> > 5 (or 3 and 4 in the later versions) are used in ths additional tests.
> >
> > So I think it shold be something different?
>
> Yeah, I tested with your patch where you had a different test case,
> with "026_timeline_issue_2.pl", I am able to reproduce the issue.
That said, I don't object if we decide to choose the crafted archive
command as far as we consider the trade-offs between the two ways.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center