Re: prevent immature WAL streaming
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: prevent immature WAL streaming |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3187351.1633028036@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: prevent immature WAL streaming (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: prevent immature WAL streaming
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=prairiedog&dt=2021-09-29%2022%3A05%3A44 which is complaining that the (misspelled, BTW) log message 'sucessfully skipped missing contrecord at' doesn't show up. This machine is old, slow, and 32-bit bigendian. I first thought the problem might be "didn't wait long enough", but it seems like waiting for replay ought to be sufficient. What I'm now guessing is that the test case is making unwarranted assumptions about how much WAL will be generated, such that no page-crossing contrecord actually appears. Also, digging around, I see hornet showed the same problem: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=hornet&dt=2021-09-29%2018%3A19%3A55 hornet is 64-bit bigendian ... so maybe this actually reduces to an endianness question? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: