| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_get_replication_slot() marked not strict, crashes |
| Date: | 2022-03-28 04:17:42 |
| Message-ID: | 631491.1648441062@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2022-03-28 08:28:29 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> I am not sure if for 14 we can make a catalog change as that would
>> require catversion bump, so adding a code-level check as suggested by
>> Andres seems like a better option. Andres/Tom, any better ideas for
>> this?
> I think we could do the catalog change too, so that future initdb's are marked
> correctly. But we obviously do need the code-level check nevertheless.
Yeah. We have to install the C-level check, so I don't see any
point in changing the catalogs in back branches. That'll create
confusion while not saving anything.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-03-28 04:31:16 | Re: Preventing indirection for IndexPageGetOpaque for known-size page special areas |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-03-28 04:09:29 | Re: pg_stat_get_replication_slot() marked not strict, crashes |