On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> wrote:
> On Oct26, 2011, at 15:12 , Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> The read fails because their is no data at the location it's trying to
>>> read from, because clog hasn't been extended yet by recovery.
>>
>> You don't actually know that, though I agree it seems a reasonable
>> guess and was my first thought also.
>
> The actual error message also supports that theory. Here's the relevant
> snippet from the OP's log (Found in CA9FD2FE.1D8D2%linas.virbalas@continuent.com)
>
> 2011-09-21 13:41:05 CEST FATAL: could not access status of transaction 1188673
> 2011-09-21 13:41:05 CEST DETAIL: Could not read from file "pg_clog/0001" at offset 32768: Success.
>
> Note that it says "Success" at the end of the second log entry. That
> can only happen, I think, if we're trying to read the page adjacent to
> the last page in the file. The seek would be successfull, and the subsequent
> read() would indicate EOF by returning zero bytes. None of the calls would
> set errno. If there was a real IO error, read() would set errno, and if the
> page wasn't adjacent to the last page in the file, seek() would set errno.
> In both cases we'd see the corresponding error messag, not "Success".
And even more pointedly, in the original go around on this:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.postgresql.devel.general/174056
He reported that clog/0000 after pg_start_backup call: -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 8192 Sep 23 14:31 0000
Changed during the rsync phase to this: -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 16384 Sep 23 14:33 0000
But on the slave, of course, it was copied before it was extend so it
was the original size (that's ok, that's the point of recovery after
the backup): -rw------- 1 postgres postgres 8192 Sep 23 14:31 0000
With the error: 2011-09-23 14:33:46 CEST FATAL: could not access status of transaction 37206 2011-09-23 14:33:46 CEST
DETAIL: Could not read from file
"pg_clog/0000" at offset 8192: Success.
And that error happens *before* recovery even can get attempted.
And that if he copied the "recent" clog/0000 from the master, it did start up.
And I think they also reported that if they didn't run hot standby,
but just normal recovery into a new master, it didn't have the problem
either, i.e. without hotstandby, recovery ran, properly extended the
clog, and then ran as a new master fine.
a.
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
