Re: 001_rep_changes.pl fails due to publisher stuck on shutdown
От | Shlok Kyal |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 001_rep_changes.pl fails due to publisher stuck on shutdown |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CANhcyEV2c6MCJR0UTNM7Roa-Gq77E+cJP=6CjdogqDPpj=mUCw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 001_rep_changes.pl fails due to publisher stuck on shutdown (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 001_rep_changes.pl fails due to publisher stuck on shutdown
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 11:49, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote: > > At Thu, 6 Jun 2024 12:49:45 +1000, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote in > > Hi, I have reproduced this multiple times now. > > > > I confirmed the initial post/steps from Alexander. i.e. The test > > script provided [1] gets itself into a state where function > > ReadPageInternal (called by XLogDecodeNextRecord and commented "Wait > > for the next page to become available") constantly returns > > XLREAD_FAIL. Ultimately the test times out because WalSndLoop() loops > > forever, since it never calls WalSndDone() to exit the walsender > > process. > > Thanks for the repro; I believe I understand what's happening here. > > During server shutdown, the latter half of the last continuation > record may fail to be flushed. This is similar to what is described in > the commit message of commit ff9f111bce. While shutting down, > WalSndLoop() waits for XLogSendLogical() to consume WAL up to > flushPtr, but in this case, the last record cannot complete without > the continuation part starting from flushPtr, which is > missing. However, in such cases, xlogreader.missingContrecPtr is set > to the beginning of the missing part, but something similar to > > So, I believe the attached small patch fixes the behavior. I haven't > come up with a good test script for this issue. Something like > 026_overwrite_contrecord.pl might work, but this situation seems a bit > more complex than what it handles. > > Versions back to 10 should suffer from the same issue and the same > patch will be applicable without significant changes. I tested the changes for PG 12 to master as we do not support prior versions. The patch applied successfully for master and PG 16. I ran the test provided in [1] multiple times and it ran successfully each time. The patch did not apply on PG 15. I did a similar change for PG 15 and created a patch. I ran the test multiple times and it was successful every time. The patch did not apply on PG 14 to PG 12. I did a similar change in each branch. But the tests did not pass in each branch. I have attached a patch which applies successfully on the PG 15 branch. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/f15d665f-4cd1-4894-037c-afdbe369287e@gmail.com Thanks and Regards, Shlok Kyal
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: