On Mon, 08 Feb 2021 17:32:46 +0900 (JST) Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote:
> At Mon, 8 Feb 2021 14:12:35 +0900, Yugo NAGATA <nag...@sraoss.co.jp> wrote in > > > > > I think the right fix should be that the state should never go from > > > > > ‘paused’ to ‘pause requested’ so I think pg_wal_replay_pause should > > > > > take > > > > > care of that. > > > > > > > > It makes sense to take care of this in pg_wal_replay_pause, but I wonder > > > > it can not handle the case that a user resume and pause again while a > > > > sleep. > > > > > > Right, we will have to check and set in the loop. But we should not > > > allow the state to go from paused to pause requested irrespective of > > > this. > > > > I agree with you. > > Is there any actual harm if PAUSED returns to REQUESETED, assuming we > immediately change the state to PAUSE always we see REQUESTED in the > waiting loop, despite that we allow change the state from PAUSE to > REQUESTED via NOT_PAUSED between two successive loop condition checks? If a user call pg_wal_replay_pause while recovery is paused, users can observe 'pause requested' during a sleep alghough the time window is short. It seems a bit odd that pg_wal_replay_pause changes the state like this because This state meeans that recovery may not be 'paused'. -- Yugo NAGATA <nag...@sraoss.co.jp>
