On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 09:39:17PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Now, would anyone be too upset if I push these in this other order? I > realized that the reason the tests broke after Sergei's patch is that > recovery/t/001_stream_rep.pl's get_slot_xmins() is broken for temp > walreceiver slots, since it's using the non-temp name it tries to give > to the slot, rather than the temp name under which it is actually > created. The workaround proposed by 0002 is to edit standby_1's config > to set walreceiver's slot to be non-temp.
FWIW, I find a bit strange that the change introduced in 001_stream_rep.pl as of patch 0002 is basically undone in 0003 by changing the default value of wal_receiver_create_temp_slot. > The reason is that I think I would like to get Sergei's patch pushed > right away (0001+0002, as a single commit); but that I think there's > more to attack in the walreceiver temp slot code than 0003 here, and I > don't want to delay the new feature any longer while I figure out the > fix for that. Not sure I agree with this approach. I'd rather fix all the existing known problems first, and then introduce the new features on top of what we consider to be a clean state. If we lack of time between the first and second patches, we may have a risk of keeping the code with the new feature but without the fixes discussed for wal_receiver_create_temp_slot. > (The thing is: if I specify primary_slot_name in the config, why is the > temp walreceiver slot code not obeying that name? I think walreceiver > should create a temp slot, sure, but using the given name rather than > coming up with a random name.) Good point. I am not sure either why the current logic has been chosen. The discussion related to the original patch is in this area: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4792e456-d75f-8e6a-2d47-34b8f78c2...@2ndquadrant.com > (The other reason is that I would like to push one patch to fix > walreceiver tmp slot rather than two, setting the thing first this way > and then the opposite way.) So your problem here is that by applying first 0003 and then 0001-0002 you would finish by switching wal_receiver_create_temp_slot to PGC_POSTMASTER, and then back to PGC_SIGHUP again? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
