Re: Bug in pg_restore with EventTrigger in parallel mode

From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug in pg_restore with EventTrigger in parallel mode
Date: 2020-03-09 19:44:34
Message-ID: CAFcNs+oj4pTsih3F83ApV72Hfxp5Tzi9eAbJCjRPYch=ZrVZ8w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:59 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> =?UTF-8?Q?Fabr=C3=ADzio_de_Royes_Mello?= <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 12:27 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Which, TBH, makes me wonder about the validity of the original
complaint
> >> in this thread. I don't mind delaying ET restore as long as we
feasibly
> >> can; but if you have an ET that is going to misbehave during restore,
> >> you are in for pain, and it's hard to consider that that pain isn't
> >> self-inflicted.
>
> > The proposed patch solve the original complain. I was just trying to
> > understand completely what you pointed out before and I agree with you.
> > Thanks for the clear explanation.
>
> OK, thanks for confirming that this solves your issue in practice.
>
> > About the patch LGTM and IMHO we should back-patch it to all supported
> > versions.
>
> Done.
>

Great, thanks!

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Dolgov 2020-03-09 19:57:14 Re: Index Skip Scan
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2020-03-09 19:41:51 Re: [HACKERS] WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors