Re: Back-branch update releases coming in a couple weeks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From MauMau
Subject Re: Back-branch update releases coming in a couple weeks
Date
Msg-id D6A08626845446818DA32116608C6995@maumau
Whole thread Raw
In response to Back-branch update releases coming in a couple weeks  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Back-branch update releases coming in a couple weeks
List pgsql-hackers
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> Since we've fixed a couple of relatively nasty bugs recently, the core
> committee has determined that it'd be a good idea to push out PG update
> releases soon.  The current plan is to wrap on Monday Feb 4 for public
> announcement Thursday Feb 7.  If you're aware of any bug fixes you think
> ought to get included, now's the time to get them done ...

I've just encountered a serious problem, and I really wish it would be fixed 
in the upcoming minor release.  Could you tell me whether this is already 
fixed and will be included?

I'm using synchronous streaming replication with PostgreSQL 9.1.6 on Linux. 
There are two nodes: one is primary and the other is a standby.  When I 
performed failover tests by doing "pg_ctl stop -mi" against the primary 
while some applications are reading/writing the database, the standby 
crashed while it was performing recovery after receiving promote request:

...
LOG:  archive recovery complete
WARNING:  page 506747 of relation base/482272/482304 was uninitialized
PANIC:  WAL contains references to invalid pages
LOG:  startup process (PID 8938) was terminated by signal 6: Aborted
LOG:  terminating any other active server processes
(the log ends here)

The mentioned relation is an index.  The contents of the referred page was 
all zeros when I looked at it with "od -t x $PGDATA/base/482272/482304.3" 
after the crash.  The subsequent pages of the same file had valid-seeming 
contents.

I searched through PostgreSQL mailing lists with "WAL contains references to 
invalid pages", and i found 19 messages.  Some people encountered similar 
problem.  There were some discussions regarding those problems (Tom and 
Simon Riggs commented), but those discussions did not reach a solution.

I also found a discussion which might relate to this problem.  Does this fix 
the problem?

[BUG] lag of minRecoveryPont in archive recovery
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20121206.130458.170549097.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp


Regards
MauMau




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: logical changeset generation v4 - Heikki's thoughts about the patch state
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pg_isready (was: [WIP] pg_ping utility)