On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 03:52:59PM +0530, Kuntal Ghosh wrote: > I accept that configuring master-standby on the same machine for this > test is not okay. But, can we avoid the PANIC somehow? Or, is this > intentional and I should not include testtablespace in this case?
Well, it is a bit more than "not okay", as the primary and the standby step on each other's toe because they are trying to use the same tablespace path. The PANIC is also expected as that's what we want with data_sync_retry = off, which is the default, and the wanted behavior to PANIC immediately and enforce WAL recovery should a fsync fail. Obviously, not being able to have transparent tablespace handling for multiple nodes on the same host is a problem, though this implies grammar changes for CREATE TABLESPACE or having a sort of node name handling which makes the experience trouble-less. Still there is the argument that not all users would want both instances to use the same tablespace path. So the problem is not as simple as it looks, and the cost of solving it is not worth the use cases either. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
