| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DROP SUBSCRIPTION, query cancellations and slot handling |
| Date: | 2017-04-21 02:57:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTeaMD2BM84dgMYc44nHcKw9LnD9QUGOiBCdOdx2-7Xng@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Petr Jelinek
<petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 20/04/17 23:30, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>
> Very simple patch to make.
+1 for that.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-04-21 03:00:31 | Re: Unportable implementation of background worker start |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-04-21 02:55:16 | Re: some review comments on logical rep code |