pending patch: Re: [HACKERS] Streaming replication and pg_xlogfile_name()
in [PgSql]
|
Prev: pending patch: Re: [HACKERS] HS/SR and smart shutdown
Next: UUIDs generated using ossp-uuid on windows not unique
From: Fujii Masao on 30 Mar 2010 05:14 On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> It's not clear what it should return, a TLI corresponding the filename >>> of the WAL segment the record was replayed from, so that you can use >>> pg_xlogfile_name() to find out the filename of the WAL segment being >>> replayed, or the accurate TLI of the record being replayed. I'm leaning >>> towards the latter, it feels more correct and accurate, but you could >>> argue for the former too. In any case, it needs to be well-defined. >> >> I agree with you that the latter is more correct and accurate. The simple >> fix is updating the lastPageTLI with the CheckPoint->ThisTimeLineID when >> replaying the shutdown checkpoint record. Though we might need to use new >> variable to keep the last applied timeline instead of the lastPageTLI. > > Here is the revised patch. I used new local variable instead of lastPageTLI > to track the tli of last applied record. It is updated with the tli of the > log page header when reading the page, and with the tli of the checkpoint > record when replaying the checkpoint shutdown record that changes the tli. > So pg_last_xlog_replay_location() can return the accurate tli of the last > applied record. I rebased the patch to HEAD. Should I think that the patch has been rejected because it has remained pending for about one month? Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
From: Robert Haas on 1 Apr 2010 13:22 On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 5:14 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> It's not clear what it should return, a TLI corresponding the filename >>>> of the WAL segment the record was replayed from, so that you can use >>>> pg_xlogfile_name() to find out the filename of the WAL segment being >>>> replayed, or the accurate TLI of the record being replayed. I'm leaning >>>> towards the latter, it feels more correct and accurate, but you could >>>> argue for the former too. In any case, it needs to be well-defined. >>> >>> I agree with you that the latter is more correct and accurate. The simple >>> fix is updating the lastPageTLI with the CheckPoint->ThisTimeLineID when >>> replaying the shutdown checkpoint record. Though we might need to use new >>> variable to keep the last applied timeline instead of the lastPageTLI. >> >> Here is the revised patch. I used new local variable instead of lastPageTLI >> to track the tli of last applied record. It is updated with the tli of the >> log page header when reading the page, and with the tli of the checkpoint >> record when replaying the checkpoint shutdown record that changes the tli. >> So pg_last_xlog_replay_location() can return the accurate tli of the last >> applied record. > > I rebased the patch to HEAD. Should I think that the patch has been rejected > because it has remained pending for about one month? Can someone explain to me in plain language what problem this is trying to fix? I'm having trouble figuring it out. ....Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Fujii Masao on 1 Apr 2010 22:53 On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Can someone explain to me in plain language what problem this is > trying to fix? I'm having trouble figuring it out. The problem is that pg_xlogfile_name(pg_last_xlog_receive_location()) and pg_xlogfile_name(pg_last_xlog_replay_location()) might report an inaccurate WAL file name because currently pg_xlogfile_name() always uses the current timeline to calculate the WAL file name. For example, even though the last applied WAL file is 000000010000000000000002, the standby wrongly reports that 000000000000000000000002 has been applied last. postgres=# SELECT l lsn, pg_xlogfile_name(l) filename FROM pg_last_xlog_replay_location() AS l; lsn | filename -----------+-------------------------- 0/200FF70 | 000000000000000000000002 (1 row) $ ls sby/pg_xlog/ 000000010000000000000002 000000010000000000000003 archive_status Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Fujii Masao on 6 Apr 2010 07:02 On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Can someone explain to me in plain language what problem this is >>> trying to fix? I'm having trouble figuring it out. >> >> The problem is that pg_xlogfile_name(pg_last_xlog_receive_location()) and >> pg_xlogfile_name(pg_last_xlog_replay_location()) might report an inaccurate >> WAL file name because currently pg_xlogfile_name() always uses the current >> timeline to calculate the WAL file name. For example, even though the last >> applied WAL file is 000000010000000000000002, the standby wrongly reports >> that 000000000000000000000002 has been applied last. > > Should we throw an error in pg_xlogfile_name() if called during > recovery? It's not doing anything useful as it is. I have no objection for now. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Fujii Masao on 6 Apr 2010 08:05
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Should we throw an error in pg_xlogfile_name() if called during >> recovery? It's not doing anything useful as it is. > > I have no objection for now. Here is the patch. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center |