Thread: The behavior of CheckRequiredParameterValues()
Hi all,
I had doubts regarding behavior of CheckRequiredParameterValues() function.
I could not start standby server which is created by pg_basebackup
with following scenario.
1. Start the master server with 'wal_level = archve' , 'hot_standby =
on' and other settings of replication.
2. Create the standby server from the master server by using pg_basebackup.
3. Change the wal_level value of both master and standby server to
'hot_standby'.
4. Restarting the master server.
5. Starting the standby server.
In #5, I got following error even if I set wal_level to 'hot_standby'.
FATAL: hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not set to
"hot_standby" or higher on the master server
I tried to investigate this behaviour.
Currently CheckRequiredParameterValues() function uses wal_level value
which is got from ControlFile when comparing between wal_level and
WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY as following code.
xlog.c:6177if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY) ereport(ERROR, (errmsg("hot standby is not
possiblebecause wal_level was not
So we have to start and stop standby server with changed
wal_level(i.g., hot_standby) if we want to enable hot standby.
In this case, I think that the standby server didn't need to confirm
wal_level value of ControlFile.
I think that it should confirm value which is written in postgreql.conf.
I might be missing something.
Please let me know that.
Regards,
-------
Sawada Masahiko
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I had doubts regarding behavior of CheckRequiredParameterValues() function.
I could not start standby server which is created by pg_basebackup
with following scenario.
1. Start the master server with 'wal_level = archve' , 'hot_standby =
on' and other settings of replication.
2. Create the standby server from the master server by using pg_basebackup.
3. Change the wal_level value of both master and standby server to
'hot_standby'.
4. Restarting the master server.
5. Starting the standby server.
In #5, I got following error even if I set wal_level to 'hot_standby'.
FATAL: hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not set to
"hot_standby" or higher on the master server
I tried to investigate this behaviour.
Currently CheckRequiredParameterValues() function uses wal_level value
which is got from ControlFile when comparing between wal_level and
WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY as following code.
xlog.c:6177
if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY)
ereport(ERROR,
(errmsg("hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not
So we have to start and stop standby server with changed
wal_level(i.g., hot_standby) if we want to enable hot standby.
In this case, I think that the standby server didn't need to confirm
wal_level value of ControlFile.
I think that it should confirm value which is written in postgreql.conf.
The snapshot of running transaction information is written to WAL only when the wal_level is set to 'hot_standby'.
This information is required on the standby side to recreate the running transactions.
Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> xlog.c:6177
> if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY)
> ereport(ERROR,
> (errmsg("hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not
>
> So we have to start and stop standby server with changed
> wal_level(i.g., hot_standby) if we want to enable hot standby.
> In this case, I think that the standby server didn't need to confirm
> wal_level value of ControlFile.
> I think that it should confirm value which is written in postgreql.conf.
>
I think checking it from the control file on a standby in recovery
means that we should confirm if the *wal_level with which the WAL was
generated* is sufficient to now become a hot standby after recovery
finishes.
--
Amit
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> xlog.c:6177
>> if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY)
>> ereport(ERROR,
>> (errmsg("hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not
>>
>> So we have to start and stop standby server with changed
>> wal_level(i.g., hot_standby) if we want to enable hot standby.
>> In this case, I think that the standby server didn't need to confirm
>> wal_level value of ControlFile.
>> I think that it should confirm value which is written in postgreql.conf.
>>
>
> I think checking it from the control file on a standby in recovery
> means that we should confirm if the *wal_level with which the WAL was
> generated* is sufficient to now become a hot standby after recovery
> finishes.
>
Sorry, should have said:
*become a hot standby after recovery reaches a consistent state
--
Amit
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Sawada Masahiko <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> xlog.c:6177
>>> if (ControlFile->wal_level < WAL_LEVEL_HOT_STANDBY)
>>> ereport(ERROR,
>>> (errmsg("hot standby is not possible because wal_level was not
>>>
>>> So we have to start and stop standby server with changed
>>> wal_level(i.g., hot_standby) if we want to enable hot standby.
>>> In this case, I think that the standby server didn't need to confirm
>>> wal_level value of ControlFile.
>>> I think that it should confirm value which is written in postgreql.conf.
>>>
>>
>> I think checking it from the control file on a standby in recovery
>> means that we should confirm if the *wal_level with which the WAL was
>> generated* is sufficient to now become a hot standby after recovery
>> finishes.
>>
>
> Sorry, should have said:
> *become a hot standby after recovery reaches a consistent state
>
Thank you for explain!
I understood it!
Regards,
-------
Sawada Masahiko