Re: [BUG] Logical replica crash if there was an error in a function.
Anton A. Melnikov <aamelnikov@inbox.ru>
From: "Anton A. Melnikov" <aamelnikov@inbox.ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>,
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-04-05T14:04:39Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello! On 03.04.2023 21:49, Tom Lane wrote: > "Anton A. Melnikov" <aamelnikov@inbox.ru> writes: >> Now there are no any pending questions, so moved it to RFC. > > I did not think this case was worth memorializing in a test before, > and I still do not. I'm inclined to reject this patch. Earlier, when discussing this test, there was a suggestion like this: > If we were just adding a > query or two to an existing scenario, that could be okay; The current version of the test seems to be satisfies this condition. The queries added do not affect the total test time within the measurement error. This case is rare, of cause, but it really took place in practice. So either there are some more reasons why this test should not be accepted that i do not understand, or i misunderstood something from the above. Could you help me to figure out, please. Would be very grateful. Sincerely yours, -- Anton A. Melnikov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
Commits
-
Avoid crash after function syntax error in a replication worker.
- dea834938005 16.0 landed
- f2dc7f9e35a2 15.1 landed
- ed019b5ef955 11.18 landed
- d9ffccf8db4b 12.13 landed
- b00f342ea0f0 13.9 landed
- 5f3cec77b1b5 10.23 landed
- 2489c38cdc58 14.6 landed