Re: Race condition in recovery?
Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Date: 2021-05-27T07:17:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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 > > Maybe we can somehow achieve that without a broken archive command, > > but I am not sure how it is enough to just delete WAL from pg_wal? I > > mean my original case was that > > 1. Got the new history file from the archive but did not get the WAL > > file yet which contains the checkpoint after TL switch > > 2. So the standby2 try to stream using new primary using old TL and > > set the wrong TL in expectedTLEs > > > > But if you are not doing anything to stop archiving WAL files or to > > guarantee that WAL has come to archive and you deleted those then I am > > not sure how we are reproducing the original problem. > > Thanks for the reply! > > 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. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Commits
-
Further refinement of stuck_on_old_timeline recovery test
- e46f6a078c1a 9.6.23 landed
- 1dc53c914fe8 10.18 landed
- c0a7587807dd 11.13 landed
- fb3d6b0e1aa4 12.8 landed
- d906d106f854 13.4 landed
- 54a5ed220169 14.0 landed
-
Adjust new test case to set wal_keep_segments.
- 6cd0e55f9ffb 9.6.23 landed
- 1c2c6a9a299c 10.18 landed
- 534b9be805b4 11.13 landed
- 2208d71a0099 12.8 landed
-
Adjust new test case to set wal_keep_size.
- 3465328aa19e 13.4 landed
- 4dcb1d087aeb 14.0 landed
-
Fix corner case failure of new standby to follow new primary.
- 6eb5b9ae3917 9.6.23 landed
- 31bda6a22ad1 10.18 landed
- ca158c168ea3 11.13 landed
- 5d950c721d38 12.8 landed
- 082656429215 13.4 landed
- caba8f0d43fb 14.0 landed
-
Back-port a few PostgresNode.pm methods.
- 75212a854f99 9.6.23 landed
-
Allow PostgresNode.pm's backup method to accept backup_options.
- 9778a191a4c0 10.18 landed
- 38982b8b7bd9 11.13 landed
- 6fc2febc28ae 12.8 landed
- 99a0a2ada8c5 13.4 landed
-
Add end-to-end testing of pg_basebackup's tar-format output.
- 081876d75ea1 14.0 cited
-
Allow PostgresNode.pm tests to wait for catchup
- fb093e4cb36f 10.0 cited
-
Delay reading timeline history file until it's fetched from master.
- ee994272ca50 9.3.0 cited