Re: Return value of pg_promote()
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>,
Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-06-07T16:25:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2023/06/07 2:00, Laurenz Albe wrote: > On Tue, 2023-06-06 at 16:35 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: >> At present, pg_promote() returns true to the caller on successful >> promotion of standby, however it returns false in multiple scenarios >> which includes: >> >> 1) The SIGUSR1 signal could not be sent to the postmaster process. >> 2) The postmaster died during standby promotion. >> 3) Standby couldn't be promoted within the specified wait time. >> >> For an application calling this function, if pg_promote returns false, >> it is hard to interpret the reason behind it. So I think we should >> *only* allow pg_promote to return false when the server could not be >> promoted in the given wait time and in other scenarios it should just >> throw an error (FATAL, ERROR ... depending on the type of failure that >> occurred). Please let me know your thoughts on this change. thanks.! > > As the original author, I'd say that that sounds reasonable, particularly > in case #1. If the postmaster dies, we are going to die too, so it > probably doesn't matter much. But I think an error is certainly also > correct in that case. +1 Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Commits
-
Tweak pg_promote() to report failures on kill() or postmaster failures
- f593c5517d14 17.0 landed