Re: Wrong HINT during database recovery when occur a minimal wal. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From lchch1990@sina.cn
Subject Re: Wrong HINT during database recovery when occur a minimal wal.
Date
Msg-id 2021011517041846789517@sina.cn
Whole thread Raw
In response to Wrong HINT during database recovery when occur a minimal wal.  (<lchch1990@sina.cn>)
Responses Re: Wrong HINT during database recovery when occur a minimal wal.
List pgsql-hackers

>Mmm. Maybe something's missing. If you took the base-backup using
>pg_basebackup, that means max_wal_senders > 0 on the primary. If you
>lowered wal_level in the backup (or replica) then started it, You
>would get something like this.
>| FATAL: WAL streaming (max_wal_senders > 0) requires wal_level "replica" or "logical".
>If you changed max_wal_senders to zero, you would get the following instead.
>| FATAL:  hot standby is not possible because max_wal_senders = 0 is a lower setting than on the primary server (its value was 2)
Then mark hot_standby off and continue try lowered wal_level.
And do recovery from the basebackup, then you will see the FATAL.

>So I couldn't reproduce the situation.
>Anyways.
 
>> My question is that what's the mean of  [set wal_level to "replica" on the primary] in
>> HINT describe, I can't think over a case to solve this FATAL by set wal_level, I can
>> solve it by turn off hot_standby only.
>>
>> Do you think we can do this code change?
>> --- a/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
>> +++ b/src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
>> @@ -6300,7 +6300,7 @@ CheckRequiredParameterValues(void)
>>   if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_REPLICA)
>>   ereport(ERROR,
>>   (errmsg("hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not set to \"replica\" or higher on the primary server"),
>> -  errhint("Either set wal_level to \"replica\" on the primary, or turn off hot_standby here.")));
>> +  errhint("You should turn off hot_standby here.")));
 
>Since it's obvious that the change in a primary cannot be propagted by
>taking a backup or starting replication, the first sentence reads to
>me as "you should retake a base-backup from a primary where wal_level
>is replica or higher". So *I* don't think it needs a fix.
I think this HINT is want to guide users to finish this recovery, and the first guide is
invalid in my opinion.


Regards,
Highgo Software (Canada/China/Pakistan)
URL : www.highgo.ca
EMAIL: mailto:movead(dot)li(at)highgo(dot)ca

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Occasional tablespace.sql failures in check-world -jnn
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: fdatasync(2) on macOS