Re: Refactor pg_rewind code and make it work against a standby
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Refactor pg_rewind code and make it work against a standby |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 037e42e3-8109-40d5-5be4-36912e5a7b69@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Refactor pg_rewind code and make it work against a standby (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Refactor pg_rewind code and make it work against a standby
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 15/11/2020 09:07, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> Not sure if you noticed, but piculet has twice failed the >> 007_standby_source.pl test that was added by 9c4f5192f: >> ... >> Now, I'm not sure what to make of that, but I can't help noticing that >> piculet uses --disable-atomics while francolin uses --disable-spinlocks. >> That leads the mind towards some kind of low-level synchronization >> bug ... > > Or, maybe it's less mysterious than that. The failure looks like we > have not waited long enough for the just-inserted row to get replicated > to node C. That wait is implemented as > > $lsn = $node_a->lsn('insert'); > $node_b->wait_for_catchup('node_c', 'write', $lsn); > > which looks fishy ... shouldn't wait_for_catchup be told to > wait for replay of that LSN, not just write-the-WAL? Yep, quite right. Fixed that way, thanks for the debugging! - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: