From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Krzysztof Kois <krzysztof(dot)kois(at)unitygroup(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Unresolved repliaction hang and stop problem. |
Date: | 2021-04-28 14:06:36 |
Message-ID: | 20210428140636.GA12179@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Apr-28, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 6:48 AM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> > Hmm ... On what does it depend (other than plain git conflicts, which
> > are aplenty)? On a quick look to the commit, it's clear that we need to
> > be careful in order not to cause an ABI break, but that doesn't seem
> > impossible to solve, but I'm wondering if there is more to it than that.
>
> As mentioned in the commit message, we need another commit [1] change
> to make this work.
>
> [1] - https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=c55040ccd0
Oh, yeah, that looks tougher. (Still not impossible: it adds a new WAL
message type, but we have added such on a minor release before.)
... It's strange that replication worked for them on pg10 though and
broke on 13. What did we change anything to make it so? (I don't have
any fish to fry on this topic at present, but it seems a bit
concerning.)
--
Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2021-04-28 14:09:46 | Re: pg_hba.conf.sample wording improvement |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-04-28 13:43:58 | Re: Since '2001-09-09 01:46:40'::timestamp microseconds are lost when extracting epoch |