| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gilles Darold <gilles(at)darold(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] pg_dump blocked |
| Date: | 2022-11-19 17:02:32 |
| Message-ID: | 2605699.1668877352@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gilles Darold <gilles(at)darold(dot)net> writes:
> Le 17/11/2022 à 17:59, Tom Lane a écrit :
>> I didn't want to back-patch e3fcbbd62 at the time, but it's probably aged
>> long enough now to be safe to back-patch. If we do anything here,
>> it should be to back-patch the whole thing, else we've only partially
>> fixed the issue.
> Here are the different patched following the PostgreSQL version from 11
> to 14, they should apply on the corresponding stable branches.
Reviewed and pushed --- thanks for doing the legwork!
Trawling the commit log, I found the follow-on patch 3e6e86abc,
which fixed another issue of the same kind. I back-patched that
too.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-11-19 18:41:30 | Re: allowing for control over SET ROLE |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-11-19 15:56:33 | Re: ssl tests aren't concurrency safe due to get_free_port() |