Re: Possible bug in logical replication.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Arseny Sher <a(dot)sher(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, konstantin knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Possible bug in logical replication.
Date: 2018-06-20 05:33:04
Message-ID: 20180620053304.GE19346@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:42:36PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 06:27:56PM +0300, Arseny Sher wrote:
> It seems to me that we still want to have the slot forwarding finish in
> this case even if this is interrupted. Petr, isn't that the intention
> here?

I have been chewing a bit more on the proposed patch, finishing with the
attached to close the loop. Thoughts?
--
Michael

Attachment Content-Type Size
slot-advance-comments.patch text/x-diff 1.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Flower 2018-06-20 05:35:01 Re: Partitioning with temp tables is broken
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2018-06-20 05:31:59 Re: [HACKERS] GUC for cleanup indexes threshold.