[HACKERS] Re: logical replication and PANIC during shutdown checkpoint inpublisher - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Noah Misch
Subject [HACKERS] Re: logical replication and PANIC during shutdown checkpoint inpublisher
Date
Msg-id 20170416061258.GI2870454@tornado.leadboat.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] logical replication and PANIC during shutdown checkpoint in publisher  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Re: logical replication and PANIC during shutdowncheckpoint in publisher  (Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>)
[HACKERS] Re: logical replication and PANIC during shutdown checkpoint inpublisher  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:55:08PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> When I shut down the publisher while I repeated creating and dropping
> the subscription in the subscriber, the publisher emitted the following
> PANIC error during shutdown checkpoint.
> 
> PANIC:  concurrent transaction log activity while database system is
> shutting down
> 
> The cause of this problem is that walsender for logical replication can
> generate WAL records even during shutdown checkpoint.
> 
> Firstly walsender keeps running until shutdown checkpoint finishes
> so that all the WAL including shutdown checkpoint record can be
> replicated to the standby. This was safe because previously walsender
> could not generate WAL records. However this assumption became
> invalid because of logical replication. That is, currenty walsender for
> logical replication can generate WAL records, for example, by executing
> CREATE_REPLICATION_SLOT command. This is an oversight in
> logical replication patch, I think.
> 
> To fix this issue, we should terminate walsender for logical replication
> before shutdown checkpoint starts. Of course walsender for physical
> replication still needs to keep running until shutdown checkpoint ends,
> though.

[Action required within three days.  This is a generic notification.]

The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item.  Peter,
since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
item.  If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
v10 open item, please let us know.  Otherwise, please observe the policy on
open item ownership[1] and send a status update within three calendar days of
this message.  Include a date for your subsequent status update.  Testers may
discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
well in advance of shipping v10.  Consequently, I will appreciate your efforts
toward speedy resolution.  Thanks.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Interval for launching the table sync worker
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code