Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration
От
Andrew Gierth
Тема
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration
Дата
Msg-id
878sj4skmj.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Ответ на
Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration (hubert depesz lubaczewski)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration Victor Yegorov <vyegorov@gmail.com>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Loss of replication after simple misconfiguration hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com>
>>>>> "hubert" == hubert depesz lubaczewski writes: hubert> PostgreSQL 9.5.15 on Ubuntu bionic. [...] hubert> tried to restart only to be greeted by: hubert> 2020-04-07T15:13:49.729943+00:00 postgres[20491]: [7-1] db=,user= LOG: restored log file "000000030001779200000061" from archive hubert> 2020-04-07T15:13:49.757222+00:00 postgres[20491]: [8-1] db=,user= FATAL: could not access status of transaction 4275781146 hubert> 2020-04-07T15:13:49.757314+00:00 postgres[20491]: [8-2] db=,user= DETAIL: Could not read from file "pg_commit_ts/27D4B" at offset 245760: Success. hubert> 2020-04-07T15:13:49.757380+00:00 postgres[20491]: [8-3] db=,user= CONTEXT: xlog redo Transaction/COMMIT: 2020-04-07 02:40:10.065859+00 hubert> 2020-04-07T15:13:49.761239+00:00 postgres[20487]: [2-1] db=,user= LOG: startup process (PID 20491) exited with exit code 1 hubert> 2020-04-07T15:13:49.761387+00:00 postgres[20487]: [3-1] db=,user= LOG: terminating any other active server processes So I've been assisting hubert with analysis of this on IRC, and what we have found so far suggests: 1. the max_worker_processes thing is a red herring 2. It is virtually certain that the restart, in addition to changing max_worker_processes on the master, also changed the master's setting of track_commit_timestamp from off to on (which is clearly relevant to the issue) (We established #2 from the fact that we _do_ have the WAL files from the failed recovery, and they don't contain any COMMIT_TS_ZEROPAGE records despite covering many thousands of transactions.) I've suggested trying to reproduce the issue by changing this parameter across a crash. I did notice that 9.5.15 does have a fix for an issue in this area, but I didn't see any more recent changes - did I miss anything? -- Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления
От: Daniel Verite
Дата:
От: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Дата: