Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHGQGwHcYME6VdGwwfOrbA27A5ju+MyL4WwaUDK_tPtZ2_uNoQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w
breakdown
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> wrote: >> On Monday, October 15, 2012 3:43 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> On 13.10.2012 19:35, Fujii Masao wrote: >> > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >> > <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote: >> >> Ok, thanks. Committed. >> > >> > I found one typo. The attached patch fixes that typo. >> >> Thanks, fixed. >> >> > ISTM you need to update the protocol.sgml because you added >> > the field 'replyRequested' to WalSndrMessage and StandbyReplyMessage. > > >> >> > Is it worth adding the same mechanism (send back the reply immediately >> > if walsender request a reply) into pg_basebackup and pg_receivexlog? >> >> Good catch. Yes, they should be taught about this too. I'll look into >> doing that too. > > If you have not started and you don't have objection, I can pickup this to > complete it. > > For both (pg_basebackup and pg_receivexlog), we need to get a timeout > parameter from user in command line, as > there is no conf file here. New Option can be -t (parameter name can be > recvtimeout). > > The main changes will be in function ReceiveXlogStream(), it is a common > function for both > Pg_basebackup and pg_receivexlog. Handling will be done in same way as we > have done in walreceiver. > > Suggestions/Comments? Before implementing the timeout parameter, I think that it's better to change both pg_basebackup background process and pg_receivexlog so that they send back the reply message immediately when they receive the keepalive message requesting the reply. Currently, they always ignore such keepalive message, so status interval parameter (-s) in them always must be set to the value less than replication timeout. We can avoid this troublesome parameter setting by introducing the same logic of walreceiver into both pg_basebackup background process and pg_receivexlog. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: