I made a mistake in the configuration of my test script, in fact I cannot reproduce the problem at the moment. Yes, on the original environment there is physical replication, that's why for the lab I configured 2 nodes with physical replication. I'll try new tests next week Regards
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 7:23 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 11:15 PM Fabrice Chapuis > <fabrice636...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > Our lab is ready now. Amit, I compile Postgres 10.18 with your > patch.Tang, I used your script to configure logical replication between 2 > databases and to generate 10 million entries in an unreplicated foo table. > On a standalone instance no error message appears in log. > > I activate the physical replication between 2 nodes, and I got following > error: > > > > 2021-11-10 10:49:12.297 CET [12126] LOG: attempt to send keep alive > message > > 2021-11-10 10:49:12.297 CET [12126] STATEMENT: START_REPLICATION > 0/3000000 TIMELINE 1 > > 2021-11-10 10:49:15.127 CET [12064] FATAL: terminating logical > replication worker due to administrator command > > 2021-11-10 10:49:15.127 CET [12036] LOG: worker process: logical > replication worker for subscription 16413 (PID 12064) exited with exit code > 1 > > 2021-11-10 10:49:15.155 CET [12126] LOG: attempt to send keep alive > message > > > > This message look like strange because no admin command have been > executed during data load. > > I did not find any error related to the timeout. > > The message coming from the modification made with the patch comes back > all the time: attempt to send keep alive message. But there is no "sent > keep alive message". > > > > Why logical replication worker exit when physical replication is > configured? > > > > I am also not sure why that happened may be due to > max_worker_processes reaching its limit. This can happen because it > seems you configured both publisher and subscriber in the same > cluster. Tang, did you also see the same problem? > > BTW, why are you bringing physical standby configuration into the > test? Does in your original setup where you observe the problem the > physical standbys were there? > > -- > With Regards, > Amit Kapila. >
