Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRUTRQvBYiDY-rC04+FOg0vUKCOAvAFZViw7fw8CnJjWA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> As soon as a single checkpoint ever happened the early-return logic in
>> CreateCheckPoint() will fail to take the LogStandbySnapshot() in
>> CreateCheckPoint() into account. The test is:
>>     if (curInsert == ControlFile->checkPoint +
>>         MAXALIGN(SizeOfXLogRecord + sizeof(CheckPoint)) &&
>>         ControlFile->checkPoint == ControlFile->checkPointCopy.redo)
>> which obviously doesn't work if there's been a WAL record logged after
>> the redo pointer has been determined etc.
>
> Yes. If segment switches are enforced at a pace faster than
> checkpoint_timeout, this check considers that a checkpoint needs to
> happen because a SWITCH_XLOG record is in-between. I am a bit
> surprised that this should happen actually. The segment switch
> triggers a checkpoint record, and vice-versa, even for idle systems.
> Shouldn't we make this check a bit smarter then?

Ah, the documentation clearly explains that setting archive_timeout
will enforce a segment switch if any activity occurred, including a
checkpoint:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/runtime-config-wal.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-WAL-ARCHIVING
I missed that, sorry.

I have as well thought a bit about adding a space-related constraint
on the standby snapshot generated by the bgwriter, so as to not rely
entirely on the interval of 15s. I finished with the attached that
uses a check based on CheckPointSegments / 8 to be sure that at least
this number of segments has been generated since the last checkpoint
before logging a new snapshot. I guess that's less brittle than the
last patch. Thoughts?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kouhei Kaigai
Date:
Subject: Re: CustomScan support on readfuncs.c
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench gaussian/exponential docs improvements