Re: pg_ctl promote wait - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Subject | Re: pg_ctl promote wait |
Date | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqTS5J3-G_zTow0Kc5oqZn877RDDN1Mfcqm2PscAS7FnAw@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: pg_ctl promote wait (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: pg_ctl promote wait
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would suggest using >> $node_standby->poll_query_until('SELECT pg_is_in_recovery()') to >> validate the end of the test. > > Meh. SELECT NOT pg_is_in_recovery(). This will wait until the query > returns true. Here are some comments about 0002 + if ((fd = open(control_file_path, O_RDONLY | PG_BINARY, 0)) == -1) + { + fprintf(stderr, _("%s: could not open file \"%s\" for reading: %s\n"), + progname, control_file_path, strerror(errno)); + exit(1); + } [...] Most of the logic of get_control_dbstate() is a mimic of the recently-introduced get_controlfile() in controldata_utils.c of dc7d70e. I think that we had better use that, and that we had better emit an error should an incorrect control file be found while running those pg_ctl commands as the control file present had better have a correct CRC all the time or something wrong is going on. So this would lead to this logic for get_control_dbstate(): control_file_data = get_controlfile(pg_data, progname); res = control_file_data->state; pfree(control_file_data); Except that, 0002 is a good thing to have, switching from the presence of recovery.conf to what is in the control data file is definitely more robust, a lot of things happen from when recovery.conf is renamed to recovery.done until WAL is enabled for backends, particularly the end of recovery checkpoint and the cleanup of the WAL segments of the previous timeline. And now for 0003... +$node_standby->command_like(['psql', '-X', '-A', '-t', '-c', 'SELECT pg_is_in_recovery()'], + qr/^t$/, + 'standby is in recovery'); [...] +$node_standby->command_like(['psql', '-X', '-A', '-t', '-c', 'SELECT pg_is_in_recovery()'], + qr/^f$/, + 'promoted standby is not in recovery'); for those two you can use $node_standby->psql_safe to get back a query result. > The subsequent discussion mentioned that there might still be a window > between end of waiting and when read-write queries would be accepted. I > don't know how big that window would be in practice and would be > interested in some testing and feedback. And so... Based on the previous discussion, there is an interval of time between the moment the update of the control file is done and the point where backends are allowed to emit WAL. I am really worrying about this interval of time actually, as once pg_ctl exits client applications should be guaranteed to connect to the server but the current patch would not be failure-proof, and I imagine that particularly on CPU-constrained environments this is going to become unstable. Particularly I expect that slow machines are likely going to fail in the last test of 003_promote.pl as designed (I am away from home now so I have not been able to test that unfortunately on my own stuff but that's possible) because pg_is_in_recovery is controlled by SharedRecoveryInProgress, so it may be possible that pg_is_in_recovery() returns false while the control file status is DB_IN_PRODUCTION. The main factor that can contribute to a larger window is a higher number of 2PC transactions that need to be loaded back to shared memory after scanning pg_twophase. If we are going to have a reliable promote wait mode for pg_ctl, I think that we had better first reduce this window, something that could be done is to update SharedRecoveryInProgress while holding an exclusive lock on ControlFileLock, with this flow for example. See for example the patch attached, we can reduce this window to zero for backends if some of them refer to ControlFile in shared memory thanks to ControlFileLock. For clients, there will still be a small window during which backends could write WAL and the control file status is ARCHIVE_RECOVERY on disk. If we want to have a reliable promote wait mode for pg_ctl, I think that we had better do something like the attached first. Thoughts? Looking at where is used the shared memory structure of ControlFile, one thing to worry about is CreateRestartPoint but its code paths are already using ControlFileLock when looking at the status file, so they are safe with this logic. -- Michael
Attachment
pgsql-hackers by date: