From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Error while creating subscription when server is running in single user mode |
Date: | 2017-06-02 19:00:21 |
Message-ID: | e5d9f18b-a625-e1ba-66f9-8ba9420b05da@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/1/17 21:55, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-06-01 21:42:41 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> We should look at what the underlying problem is before we prohibit
>> anything at a high level.
>
> I'm not sure there's any underlying issue here, except being in single
> user mode.
My point is that we shouldn't be putting checks into DDL commands about
single-user mode if the actual cause of the issue is in a lower-level
system. Not all uses of a particular DDL command necessary use a latch,
for example. Also, there could be other things that hit a latch that
are reachable in single-user mode that we haven't found yet.
So I think the check should either go somewhere in the latch code, or
possibly in the libpqwalreceiver code. Or we make the latch code work
so that the check-for-postmaster-death code becomes a noop in
single-user mode. Suggestions?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-06-02 19:05:33 | Re: Why does logical replication launcher set application_name? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-06-02 18:52:36 | Re: Get stuck when dropping a subscription during synchronizing table |