| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] Logical replica crash if there was an error in a function. |
| Date: | 2023-04-05 14:35:59 |
| Message-ID: | 1836541.1680705359@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Anton A. Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru> writes:
> On 03.04.2023 21:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 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.
> Could you help me to figure out, please.
The problem was an Assert that was speculative when it went in,
and which we eventually found was wrong in the context of logical
replication. We removed the Assert. I don't think we need a test
case to keep us from putting back the Assert. That line of thinking
leads to test suites that run for fourteen hours and are near useless
because developers can't run them easily.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-04-05 14:43:23 | Re: GUC for temporarily disabling event triggers |
| Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2023-04-05 14:35:37 | Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths |