Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Noah Misch
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication
Date
Msg-id 20170530025638.GF116176@gust.leadboat.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication  (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Replication status in logical replication  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:33:48AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > On 22 March 2017 at 02:50, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> When using logical replication, I ran into a situation where the
> >> pg_stat_replication.state is not updated until any wal record is sent
> >> after started up. For example, I set up logical replication with 2
> >> subscriber and restart the publisher server, but I see the following
> >> status for a while (maybe until autovacuum run).
> > ...
> >
> >> Attached patch fixes this behavior by updating WalSndCaughtUp before
> >> trying to read next WAL if already caught up.
> >
> > Looks like a bug that we should fix in PG10, with backpatch to 9.4 (or
> > as far as it goes).
> >
> > Objections to commit?
> >
> 
> Seems we still have this issue. Any update or comment on this? Barring
> any objections, I'll add this to the open item so it doesn't get
> missed.

[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: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] Re: pgsql: Code review focused on newnode types added by partitioning supp
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Server ignores contents of SASLInitialResponse