| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling |
| Date: | 2017-04-20 21:30:24 |
| Message-ID: | 93d814dd-1d41-28f5-5b68-dcc3469a25a1@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/20/17 10:19, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> Hmm well since this only affects the synchronization of table
> states/names, I guess we could just simply do that before we create the
> slot as there is no expectancy of consistency between slot and the table
> list snapshot.
I suppose that wouldn't hurt.
Prior to the table sync patch, a missing target relation would just show
up as an error later on in the logs. So having the error sooner
actually seems like a good change.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-04-20 21:35:46 | Re: Removing select(2) based latch (was Unportable implementation of background worker start) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-04-20 21:27:42 | Re: Removing select(2) based latch (was Unportable implementation of background worker start) |