Re: Improve handling of parameter differences in physical replication
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-03-09T09:45:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2020-03-09 09:11, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > I think after recovery is paused users will be better to restart the > server rather than resume the recovery. I agree with this idea but I'm > slightly concerned that users might not realize that recovery is > paused until they look at that line in server log or at > pg_stat_replication because the standby server is still functional. So > I think we can periodically send WARNING to inform user that we're > still waiting for parameter change and restart. I think that would be annoying, unless you create a system for configuring those periodic warnings. I imagine in a case like having set max_prepared_transactions but never actually using prepared transactions, people will just ignore the warning until they have their next restart, so it could be months of periodic warnings. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
Commits
-
Pause recovery for insufficient parameter settings
- 15251c0a60be 14.0 landed
-
Replace a macro by a function
- b5acf10cfc63 14.0 landed
-
Improve handling of parameter differences in physical replication
- 246f136e76ec 13.0 landed
-
Prefer standby promotion over recovery pause.
- 496ee647ecd2 13.0 cited