On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 15:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Testing takes a while on this, I probably won't complete it until > > Friday. So enclosed patch is for eyeballs only at this stage. > > What's the status on that patch?
Having some trouble trying to get a clean state change from recovery to normal mode. Startup needs to be able to write WAL at the end of recovery so it can write a ShutdownCheckpoint, yet must not be allowed to write WAL before that. Other services are still not fully up yet. So every other process apart from Startup musn't write WAL until Startup has fully completed its actions, which is sometime later. bgwriter needs to know about the impending state change so it can finish off any checkpoint its currently working on. But then can't start doing normal processing yet either. So it must have a third state that is between recovery and normal processing. When normal processing is reached, it *must* write WAL immediately from that point onwards, yet using the new timeline that startup decides upon. So the idea of a single database-wide boolean state seems impossible. We need a local canInsertWAL flag that is set at different times in different processes. Global states changes are now not started started - postmaster process then startup process safestoppingpoint - bgwriter starts startup_does_shutdown_checkpoint - bgwriter finishes up, just waits, startup is now allowed to insert WAL for checkpoint record startup completes StartupXLog - bgwriter begins normal processing startup exits - postmaster in normal state We *might* solve this by making the final checkpoint that Startup writes into an online checkpoint. That would then allow a straight and safe transition for bgwriter from just one state to the other. But that leaves some other ugliness that I don't want to deal with, 'cos there's other fish frying. Feels like I should shutdown the bgwriter after recovery and then allow it to be cranked up again after normal processing starts, and do all of this through postmaster state changes. That way bgwriter doesn't need to do a dynamic state change. Comments anyone? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches