Re: Back Port Request for INVALID Startup Packet
От | Fabio Ugo Venchiarutti |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Back Port Request for INVALID Startup Packet |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3aba09f2-6892-570e-1499-609898657719@ocado.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Back Port Request for INVALID Startup Packet (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On 12/03/2020 00:29, Tom Lane wrote: > Virendra Kumar <viru_7683@yahoo.com> writes: >> Can you please back port patch where if a 0 byte packet sent to PG instance (Health Checks), it starts complaining aboutinvalid startup packet and flood the log which increases log size considerably if the health checks are every 3 secondsor something like that. >> Patch Requested - https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=patch;h=342cb650e > > We generally don't like to change behavior of back branches without > ironclad agreement that the existing behavior is a bug ... which this > surely isn't. Also, the discussion leading up to that patch specifically > considered and rejected back-patching; so I'm disinclined to overrule > that decision now. > > I would suggest that an every-three-second health check is not > appropriate, especially one that is so minimal that it only > detects whether the postmaster is alive. Does the backend explicitly configure the kernel's TCP accept queue? Unless Postgres sets it to impractically low numbers, the above test sounds weak from yet another angle; the postmaster might be "alive" as a process but completely seized for other reasons: at least in Linux the TCP accept queue progresses the 3-way handshake so long as the bound socket's file descriptor is still held, without even waiting for accept(). I'd recommend a better probe that at least sends a startup message and expects the backend to follow up with the authentication request (no need to craft messages manually, testing for more abstract messages/states out of psql or some libpq wrapper would do). Better still, if credentials/access are available, run a query. -- Notice: This email is confidential and may contain copyright material of members of the Ocado Group. Opinions and views expressed in this message may not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of the members of the Ocado Group. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately and delete all copies of this message. Please note that it is your responsibility to scan this message for viruses. References to the "Ocado Group" are to Ocado Group plc (registered in England and Wales with number 7098618) and its subsidiary undertakings (as that expression is defined in the Companies Act 2006) from time to time. The registered office of Ocado Group plc is Buildings One & Two, Trident Place, Mosquito Way, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9UL.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: