On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 7:43 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 06:32:27PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > > End-of-recovery checkpoint is requested as CHECKPOINT_WAIT, which > > seems to me to mean the state is always DB_IN_ARCHIVE_RECOVERY while > > the checkpoint is running? > > With the patch, yes, we would keep the control file under > DB_IN_{ARCHIVE,CRASH}_RECOVERY during the whole period of the > end-of-recovery checkpoint. On HEAD, we would have DB_SHUTDOWNING > until the end-of-recovery checkpoint completes, after which we switch > to DB_SHUTDOWNED for a short time before DB_IN_PRODUCTION. > > > If correct, if server is killed druing the > > end-of-recovery checkpoint, the state stays DB_IN_ARCHIVE_RECOVERY > > instead of DB_SHUTDOWNING or DB_SHUTDOWNED. AFAICS there's no > > differece between the first two at next startup. > > One difference is the hint given to the user at the follow-up startup. > Crash and archive recovery states can freak people easily as they > mention the risk of corruption. Using DB_SHUTDOWNING reduces this > window.
If the server crashes in end-of-recovery, in the follow-up startup, the server has to start all the recovery right? In that case, DB_IN_{ARCHIVE, CRASH}_RECOVERY would represent the correct state to the user, not the DB_SHUTDOWNING/DB_SHUTDOWNED IMO. There's another option to have a new state DB_IN_END_OF_RECOVERY_CHECKPOINT, if the DB_IN_{ARCHIVE, CRASH}_RECOVERY really scares users of end-of-recovery crash? Regards, Bharath Rupireddy.