Re: Possible corruption by CreateRestartPoint at promotion
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com
Date: 2022-05-06T15:52:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, May 06, 2022 at 07:58:43PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > And I have spent a bit of this stuff to finish with the attached. It > will be a plus to get that done on HEAD for beta1, so I'll try to deal > with it on Monday. I am still a bit stressed about the back branches > as concurrent checkpoints are possible via CreateCheckPoint() from the > startup process (not the case of HEAD), but the stable branches will > have a new point release very soon so let's revisit this choice there > later. v6 attached includes a TAP test, but I don't intend to include > it as it is expensive. I was looking at other changes in this area (e.g., 3c64dcb), and now I'm wondering if we actually should invalidate the minRecoveryPoint when the control file no longer indicates archive recovery. Specifically, what happens if a base backup of a newly promoted standby is used for a point-in-time restore? If the checkpoint location is updated and all previous segments have been recycled/removed, it seems like the minRecoveryPoint might point to a missing segment. -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Commits
-
Fix control file update done in restartpoints still running after promotion
- 60e956eb825c 10.22 landed
- 4525151d4c2f 11.17 landed
- 7e59b1219109 12.12 landed
- 2e9559b30239 13.8 landed
- 6dced63b411b 14.4 landed
- 7863ee4def65 15.0 landed