RE: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication
Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
From: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
To: Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani@google.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-09-10T04:25:24Z
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 →
-
Fix typo in test file name added in commit 4909b38af0.
- 50b8ad30f754 18.0 landed
- d96206f259d6 17.5 landed
- 9987c94662c2 16.9 landed
- 90bc4523fd47 15.13 landed
- bb1bc9fa962e 14.18 landed
- 4164d6976316 13.21 landed
-
Fix data loss in logical replication.
- 247ee94150b6 13.21 landed
- 4909b38af034 18.0 landed
- cadaf0ac4637 17.5 landed
- 9a2f8b4f01d5 16.9 landed
- 9f21be08e884 15.13 landed
- 0434033e8bb5 14.18 landed
-
Avoid invalidating all RelationSyncCache entries on publication rename.
- 3abe9dc18892 18.0 cited
-
Remove obsolete RECHECK keyword completely
- 7da1bdc2c2f1 18.0 cited
-
Backport BackgroundPsql perl test module
- 187b8991f70f 16.4 cited
Attachments
- 0001-test-invalidation-distribution.patch.txt (text/plain)
On Friday, August 9, 2024 7:21 PM Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com> wrote: Hi, > > In the v7 patch, I am looping through the reorder buffer of the current committed > transaction and storing all invalidation messages in a list. Then I am > distributing those invalidations. > But I found that for a transaction we already store all the invalidation messages > (see [1]). So we don't need to loop through the reorder buffer and store the > invalidations. > > I have modified the patch accordingly and attached the same. I have tested this patch across various scenarios and did not find issues. I confirmed that changes are correctly replicated after adding the table or schema to the publication, and changes will not be replicated after removing the table or schema from the publication. This behavior is consistent in both streaming and non-streaming modes. Additionally, I verified that invalidations occurring within subtransactions are appropriately distributed. Please refer to the attached ISOLATION tests which tested the above cases. This also inspires me if it would be cheaper to write an ISOLATION test for this bug instead of building a real pub/sub cluster. But I am not against the current tests in the V8 patch as that can check the replicated data in a visible way. Best Regards, Hou zj