At Thu, 27 May 2021 12:47:30 +0530, Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote in > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 12:09 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > <horikyota....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > At Thu, 27 May 2021 11:44:47 +0530, Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> > > wrote in > > We're writing at the very beginning of the switching segment at the > > promotion time. So it is guaranteed that the first segment of the > > newer timline won't be archived until the rest almost 16MB in the > > segment is consumed or someone explicitly causes a segment switch > > (including archive timeout). > > I agree > > > > BTW, I have also tested your script and I found below log, which shows > > > that standby2 is successfully able to select the timeline2 so it is > > > not reproducing the issue. Am I missing something? > > > > standby_2? My last one 026_timeline_issue_2.pl doesn't use that name > > and uses "standby_1 and "cascade". In the ealier ones, standby_4 and > > 5 (or 3 and 4 in the later versions) are used in ths additional tests. > > > > So I think it shold be something different? > > Yeah, I tested with your patch where you had a different test case, > with "026_timeline_issue_2.pl", I am able to reproduce the issue.
That said, I don't object if we decide to choose the crafted archive command as far as we consider the trade-offs between the two ways. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
