Re: Unnecessary delay in streaming replication due to replay lag
| От | Fujii Masao | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Unnecessary delay in streaming replication due to replay lag | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAHGQGwH7dqDvs1u1G6M-wkfjk3r=SD-ybTNZ9H_O11+xnGNW-w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: Unnecessary delay in streaming replication due to replay lag (sunil s <sunilfeb26@gmail.com>) | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 5:51 PM sunil s <sunilfeb26@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Hackers, > > PFA rebased patch due to the code changes done in upstream commit 63599896545c7869f7dd28cd593e8b548983d613. > > The current status of the patch registered in Commit Fest is "Ready for Committer". + streamed WAL. Such environments can benefit from setting + <varname>wal_receiver_start_at</varname> to + <literal>startup</literal> or <literal>consistency</literal>. These + values will lead to the WAL receiver starting much earlier, and from + the end of locally available WAL. When this parameter is set to 'startup' or 'consistency', what happens if replication begins early and the startup process fails to replay a WAL record—say, due to corruption—before reaching the replication start point? In that case, the standby might fail to recover correctly because of missing WAL records, while a transaction waiting for synchronous replication may have already been acknowledged as committed. Wouldn't that lead to a serious problem? Regards, -- Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: