Re: Inconsistent DB data in Streaming Replication
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Inconsistent DB data in Streaming Replication |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHGQGwEEvc235sKxkYMQkcsPK3-U24GwbmVR3ih8jQnUgTNFag@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Inconsistent DB data in Streaming Replication (Samrat Revagade <revagade.samrat@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Inconsistent DB data in Streaming Replication
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Samrat Revagade <revagade.samrat@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > We have been trying to figure out possible solutions to the following problem in streaming replication Consider followingscenario: > > If master receives commit command, it writes and flushes commit WAL records to the disk, It also writes and flushes datapage related to this transaction. > > The master then sends WAL records to standby up to the commit WAL record. But before sending these records if failoverhappens then, old master is ahead of standby which is now the new master in terms of DB data leading to inconsistentdata . Why do you think that the inconsistent data after failover happens is problem? Because it's one of the reasons why a fresh base backup is required when starting old master as new standby? If yes, I agree with you. I've often heard the complaints about a backup when restarting new standby. That's really big problem. The timeline mismatch after failover was one of the reasons why a backup is required. But, thanks to Heikki's recent work, that's solved, i.e., the timeline mismatch would be automatically resolved when starting replication in 9.3. So, the remaining problem is an inconsistent database. > One solution to avoid this situation is have the master send WAL records to standby and wait for ACK from standby committingWAL files to disk and only after that commit data page related to this transaction on master. You mean to make the master wait the data page write until WAL has been not only flushed to disk but also replicated to the standby? > The main drawback would be increased wait time for the client due to extra round trip to standby before master sends ACKto client. Are there any other issues with this approach? I think that you can introduce GUC specifying whether this extra check is required to avoid a backup when failback. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: