Re: when the startup process doesn't (logging startup delays)

On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 at 13:33, Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 9:31 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 7:37 AM Simon Riggs
> > <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > > > Whilte at it, I noticed that we report redo progress for PITR, but we
> > > > don't report when standby enters archive recovery mode, say due to a
> > > > failure in the connection to primary or after the promote signal is
> > > > found. Isn't it useful to report in this case as well to know the
> > > > recovery progress?
> > >
> > > I think your patch disables progress too early, effectively turning
> > > off the standby progress feature. The purpose was to report on things
> > > that take long periods during recovery, not just prior to recovery.
> > >
> > > I would advocate that we disable progress only while waiting, as I've done here:
> > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANbhV-GcWjZ2cmj0uCbZDWQUHnneMi_4EfY3dVWq0-yD5o7Ccg%40mail.gmail.com
> >
> > Maybe I'm confused here, but I think that, on a standby, startup
> > progress messages are only printed until the main redo loop is
> > reached. Otherwise, we would print a message on a standby every 10s
> > forever, which seems like a thing that most users would not like. So I
> > think that Bharath has the right idea here.
>
> Yes, the idea is to disable the timeout on standby completely since we
> actually don't report any recovery progress. Keeping it enabled,
> unnecessarily calls startup_progress_timeout_handler() every
> log_startup_progress_interval seconds i.e. 10 seconds. That's the
> intention of the patch.

As long as we don't get the SIGALRMs that Thomas identified, then I'm happy.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/