Re: Improve handling of parameter differences in physical replication
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Improve handling of parameter differences in physical replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5c2e1f12-2775-6e69-c1c8-46c759417b66@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Improve handling of parameter differences in physical replication (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Improve handling of parameter differences in physical replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-02-28 08:45, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 02:37:24PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 2020-02-27 11:13, Fujii Masao wrote: >>>> Btw., I think the current setup is slightly buggy. The >> MaxBackends value that is used to size shared memory is computed as >> MaxConnections + autovacuum_max_workers + 1 + max_worker_processes + >> max_wal_senders, but we don't track autovacuum_max_workers in WAL. >>> Maybe this is because autovacuum doesn't work during recovery? >> >> Autovacuum on the primary can use locks or xids, and so it's possible that >> the standby when processing WAL encounters more of those than it has locally >> allocated shared memory to handle. > > Putting aside your patch because that sounds like a separate issue.. > Doesn't this mean that autovacuum_max_workers should be added to the > control file, that we need to record in WAL any updates done to it and > that CheckRequiredParameterValues() is wrong? That would be a direct fix, yes. Perhaps it might be better to track the combined MaxBackends instead, however. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: