Re: logical replication and PANIC during shutdown checkpoint in publisher
Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>,
PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-04-20T11:52:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 20/04/17 05:57, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut >> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> I think the problem with a signal-based solution is that there is no >>> feedback. Ideally, you would wait for all walsenders to acknowledge the >>> receipt of SIGUSR2 (or similar) and only then proceed with the shutdown >>> checkpoint. >> >> Are you sure that it is necessary to go to such extent? Why wouldn't >> it be enough to prevent any replication commands generating WAL to run >> when the WAL sender knows that the postmaster is in shutdown mode? > > 2nd thoughts here... Ah now I see your point. True that there is no > way to ensure that an unwanted command is not running when SIGUSR2 is > received as the shutdown checkpoint may have already begun. Here is an > idea: add a new state in WalSndState, say WALSNDSTATE_STOPPING, and > the shutdown checkpoint does not run as long as all WAL senders still > running do not reach such a state. > +1 to this solution -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Commits
-
Prevent possibility of panics during shutdown checkpoint.
- 862204aaceb1 9.6.4 landed
- 50581f2e74fa 9.5.8 landed
- 1cdc0ab9c180 9.4.13 landed
- c6c333436491 10.0 landed
-
Revert "Prevent panic during shutdown checkpoint"
- 703f148e98ec 10.0 landed
-
Prevent panic during shutdown checkpoint
- 086221cf6b17 10.0 cited