Re: BUG #17928: Standby fails to decode WAL on termination of primary
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, exclusion@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
Date: 2023-09-12T01:01:21Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Correct assertion and comments about XLogRecordMaxSize.
- e1f95ec8cf6e 17.0 landed
-
Fix edge-case for xl_tot_len broken by bae868ca.
- bde2f1847f51 12.17 landed
- 45d1fe8b53d4 13.13 landed
- 3d413c5a76fa 14.10 landed
- 99d334a187ae 15.5 landed
- 10d0591ea227 16.1 landed
- becfbdd6c1c9 17.0 landed
-
Don't use Perl pack('Q') in 039_end_of_wal.pl.
- 82314dbfca7f 12.17 landed
- 07896f468f23 13.13 landed
- afa504ba2f5d 14.10 landed
- 21b4c3ca0b22 15.5 landed
- cc58607b019a 16.1 landed
- 91b0e85aa0ad 17.0 landed
-
Don't trust unvalidated xl_tot_len.
- e8f3c0687116 12.17 landed
- 6606c57162cb 13.13 landed
- 3ce3b53d76a3 14.10 landed
- f4d152edd8f3 15.5 landed
- ce497f648e2d 16.1 landed
- bae868caf222 17.0 landed
-
Make recovery report error message when invalid page header is found.
- 7b03d3a3ba45 12.17 landed
- 5dc093eacef1 13.13 landed
- 2f13e8d9ec28 14.10 landed
-
Add more protections in WAL record APIs against overflows
- 8fcb32db98ed 16.0 cited
Attachments
- v6-0001-Don-t-trust-unvalidated-xl_tot_len.patch (text/x-diff) patch v6-0001
- v6-0001-Don-t-trust-unvalidated-xl_tot_len.patch.16 (text/plain)
- v6-0001-Don-t-trust-unvalidated-xl_tot_len.patch.15 (text/plain)
- v6-0001-Don-t-trust-unvalidated-xl_tot_len.patch.14 (text/plain)
- v6-0001-Don-t-trust-unvalidated-xl_tot_len.patch.13 (text/plain)
- v6-0001-Don-t-trust-unvalidated-xl_tot_len.patch.12 (text/plain)
On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 01:13:16PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Right. Let's wait for a bit and see if there are any comments on this > point. With 16.0 in sight next week, I'd like to propose that we move > on with this issue once next week's tag is pushed. Hearing nothing, I have applied the backpatch of 0668719801 to 12~14. Please find attached the remaining patches for all the stable branches. Thomas, would you prefer handling that yourself once 16.0 is tagged with a last round of checks? Or should I? (Still need to edit the commit message a bit..) -- Michael