Re: Issue with logical replication - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Kacey Holston
Subject Re: Issue with logical replication
Date
Msg-id ED3D69CC-6C75-4C58-A9C9-43D2A96420B1@pgexperts.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Issue with logical replication  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Issue with logical replication  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
My apologies.

The data was missing on PG13 from the initial copy.

> On Aug 9, 2021, at 1:58 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 1:58 AM Kacey Holston
> <kacey.holston@pgexperts.com> wrote:
>>
>> I ran into an issue of missing rows during an upgrade from  PostgreSQL 11 to PostgreSQL 13 using in core logical
replication.
>>
>> ## Procedure Used:
>>
>> After copying over all the users and schema I ran this on the publisher:
>>
>> "CREATE PUBLICATION upgrade11to13 FOR ALL TABLES;"
>>
>> Then ran this on the subscriber:
>>
>> "CREATE SUBSCRIPTION server13 CONNECTION ‘dbname=<DBNAME redacted> hostaddr=<ADDRESS redacted > user=<USER redacted
>password=<PASSWORD redacted > port=5432' PUBLICATION upgrade11to13;" 
>>
>> The initial copy and replication appeared to run as expected. I saw all the tables in the ready state in
pg_subscription_rel.The tables pg_stat_repllication and pg_stat_subscription looked as expected as well. 
>>
>> We then reversed the direction of replication by running this on the PostgreSQL 13 server:
>>
>> "DROP SUBSCRIPTION server13;”
>>
>> And this on the PostgreSQL 11 server:
>>
>> "DROP PUBLICATION upgrade11to13;”
>>
>> Back on the PostgreSQL 13 server:
>>
>> "CREATE PUBLICATION reverse_to_11 FOR ALL TABLES;"
>>
>> And on the PostgreSQL 11 server:
>>
>> "CREATE SUBSCRIPTION oldserver11 CONNECTION 'dbname=<DBNAME redacted> hostaddr=<ADDRESS redacted > user=<USER
redacted> password=<PASSWORD redacted > port=5432' PUBLICATION reverse_to_11 with (copy_data=false);" 
>>
> ..
>>
>> We were able to note that the data loss appeared to coincide approximately with the start of the table’s copy but
thedata loss ended before the table finished the copy. The table took about 12 hours to copy while the data loss was
onlythree hours. 
>>
>
> It is not very clear from the above description where exactly the data
> was missing on the PG-11 server or PG-13 server. If it is missing from
> PG-11, then how is it related to the initial copy because you
> mentioned (copy_data=false) while creating a subscription on 11 so it
> should not perform initial sync?
>
> --
> With Regards,
> Amit Kapila.




pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17137: Bug with datatypes definition in CTE
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: SEGFAULT on a concurrent UPDATE of mix of local and foreign partitions