Previously, in unlucky cases, it was possible for pg_rewind to remove
certain WAL segments from the rewound demoted primary. In particular
this happens if those files have been marked for archival (i.e., their
.ready files were created) but not yet archived; the newly promoted node
no longer has such files because of them having been recycled, but they
are likely critical for recovery in the demoted node. If pg_rewind
removes them, recovery is not possible anymore.
Fix this by maintaining a hash table of files in this situation in the
scan that looks for a checkpoint, which the decide_file_actions phase
can consult so that it knows to preserve them.
Backpatch to 14. The problem also exists in 13, but that branch was not
blessed with commit eb00f1d4bf, so this patch is difficult to apply
there. Users of older releases will just have to continue to be extra
careful when rewinding.
Co-authored-by: Полина Бунгина (Polina Bungina) <bungina@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Alexander Kukushkin <cyberdemn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Atsushi Torikoshi <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAtGL4AhzmBRsEsaDdz7065T+k+BscNadfTqP1NcPmsqwA5HBw@mail.gmail.com
Deciding what to do with each file is now a separate step after all the
necessary information has been gathered. It is more clear that way.
Previously, the decision-making was divided between process_source_file()
and process_target_file(), and it was a bit hard to piece together what
the overall rules were.
Reviewed-by: Kyotaro Horiguchi, Soumyadeep Chakraborty
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/0c5b3783-af52-3ee5-f8fa-6e794061f70d%40iki.fi
Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments
to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments
following #endif to not obey the general rule.
Commit e3860ffa4d wasn't actually using
the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that
tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of
code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be
moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's
code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops
in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working
in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the
net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed
one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves
more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such
cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after
the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after.
Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same
as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else.
That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage
from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent.
This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent
changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Update comments and function names to use the terms "source" and "target"
consistently. Some places were calling them remote and local instead, which
was confusing.
Fix incorrect comment in extractPageInfo on database creation record - it
was wrong on what happens for databases created in the target that don't
exist in source.
Bugs all spotted by Coverity, including wrong realloc() size request
and memory leaks. Cosmetic improvements by me.
The usage of the global variable "filemap" here is still pretty awful,
but at least I got rid of the gratuitous aliasing in several routines
(which was helping to annoy Coverity, as well as being a bug risk).
Earlier versions of this tool were available (and still are) on github.
Thanks to Michael Paquier, Alvaro Herrera, Peter Eisentraut, Amit Kapila,
and Satoshi Nagayasu for review.
