On 2018-11-02 15:51:34 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 01/11/2018 18:54, Andres Freund wrote:>
> >> Also, from 691d79a which you just committed:
> >> + ereport(FATAL,
> >> + (errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
> >> +errmsg("logical replication slo
On 01/11/2018 18:54, Andres Freund wrote:>
>> Also, from 691d79a which you just committed:
>> + ereport(FATAL,
>> + (errcode(ERRCODE_OBJECT_NOT_IN_PREREQUISITE_STATE),
>> +errmsg("logical replication slots \"%s\" exists, but
>> wal_level < logical",
>> +
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 10:54:23AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-11-01 09:34:05 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand though, so I
> don't think it'd have made much sense to do it at the same time. Nor do
> I think it's particularly importa
On 2018-11-01 09:34:05 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> HI Andres,
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:48:02PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > And done. Thanks for the report JD.
>
> Shouldn't we also switch the PANIC to a FATAL in
> RestoreSlotFromDisk()?
That has absolutely nothing to do with the i
HI Andres,
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:48:02PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> And done. Thanks for the report JD.
Shouldn't we also switch the PANIC to a FATAL in RestoreSlotFromDisk()?
I don't mind doing so myself if you agree with the change, only on
HEAD as you seemed to disagree about changing
On 2018-10-30 10:52:54 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
> > > StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:52:54AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Er... At the same time, shouldn't RestoreSlotFromDisk() *not* use PANIC
>> if more slots are found in pg_replslot than max_replication_slots can
>> handle. A FATAL is fine at s
On 2018-10-30 11:02:04 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 10/30/18 10:52 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather t
On 10/30/18 10:52 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check whether wal_level > mi
On 2018-10-30 11:51:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
> > StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check whether wal_level > minimal,
> > and doesn't. So you can cr
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:13:04PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> I don't think this quite is the problem. ISTM the issue is rather that
> StartupReplicationSlots() *needs* to check whether wal_level > minimal,
> and doesn't. So you can create a slot, shutdown, change wal_level,
> startup. A slot ex
On 10/29/18 11:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On October 29, 2018 1:31:56 PM EDT, "Joshua D. Drake"
wrote:
-Hackers,
Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue
where the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there
were stale replication slots from a
On 2018-10-29 16:02:18 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Oct-29, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > -Hackers,
> >
> >
> > Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue where
> > the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there were stale
> > replication slo
On 2018-Oct-29, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> -Hackers,
>
>
> Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue where
> the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there were stale
> replication slots from a recent base backup. I went to drop the replication
> slots
On October 29, 2018 1:31:56 PM EDT, "Joshua D. Drake"
wrote:
>-Hackers,
>
>
>Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue
>where the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there
>were stale replication slots from a recent base backup. I went to drop
-Hackers,
Working on 9.6 today (unsure if fixed in newer versions). Had an issue
where the wal was 280G despite max_wal_size being 8G. Found out there
were stale replication slots from a recent base backup. I went to drop
the replication slots and found that since the wal_level was set to
mi
16 matches
Mail list logo