Re: loss of transactions in streaming replication
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: loss of transactions in streaming replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobcopKvRbkdKh_qXEwMbQYa0Sg3xEu5cd1XcaOLzN_mqA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: loss of transactions in streaming replication (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:05 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> OK, so this is an artifact of the changes to make libpq communication >>>> bidirectional. But I'm still confused about where the error is coming >>>> from. In your OP, you wrote "In 9.2dev and 9.1, when walreceiver >>>> detects an error while sending data to WAL stream, it always emits >>>> ERROR even if there are data available in the receive buffer." So >>>> that implied to me that this is only going to trigger if you have a >>>> shutdown together with an awkwardly-timed error. But your scenario >>>> for reproducing this problem doesn't seem to involve an error. >>> >>> Yes, my scenario doesn't cause any real error. My original description was >>> misleading. The following would be closer to the truth: >>> >>> "In 9.2dev and 9.1, when walreceiver detects the termination of replication >>> connection while sending data to WAL stream, it always emits ERROR >>> even if there are data available in the receive buffer." >> >> Ah, OK. I think I now agree that this is a bug and that we should fix >> and back-patch. > > The patch that I posted before is well-formed enough to be adopted? Does this still need to be worked on? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: