Horton

Re: speed up a logical replica setup

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>, "kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Date: 2024-05-20T10:28:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. pg_createsubscriber: Remove obsolete comment

  2. pg_createsubscriber: Fix an unpredictable recovery wait time.

  3. Fix unstable test in 040_pg_createsubscriber.

  4. Fix the testcase introduced in commit 81d20fbf7a.

  5. Further weaken new pg_createsubscriber test on Windows.

  6. Temporarily(?) weaken new pg_createsubscriber test on Windows.

  7. Make pg_createsubscriber warn if publisher has two-phase commit enabled.

  8. Make pg_createsubscriber more wary about quoting connection parameters.

  9. pg_createsubscriber: Remove failover replication slots on subscriber

  10. pg_createsubscriber: Remove replication slot check on primary

  11. pg_createsubscriber: Only --recovery-timeout controls the end of recovery process

  12. pg_createsubscriber: creates a new logical replica from a standby server

  13. Add some const decorations

  14. Add option force_initdb to PostgreSQL::Test::Cluster:init()

  15. Remove MSVC scripts

On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 4:25 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 040_pg_createsubscriber.pl seems to be failing occasionally on
> culicidae near "--dry-run on node S".  I couldn't immediately see why.
> That animal is using EXEC_BACKEND and I also saw a one-off failure a
> bit like that on my own local Linux + EXEC_BACKEND test run
> (sorry I didn't keep the details around).  Coincidence?
>

AFAICS, this is the same as one of the two BF failures being discussed
in this thread.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.