From: | Florin Irion <irionr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, daniel(at)yesql(dot)se, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Emit a warning if the extension's GUC is set incorrectly |
Date: | 2022-02-18 11:47:23 |
Message-ID: | CA+HEvJC7xADXaz2PRc5pPj3psNT-==aQ0HxDbvqw8OgfzUa1_Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Il giorno ven 18 feb 2022 alle ore 10:58 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> ha
scritto:
> I wrote:
> > As a stopgap to turn the farm green again, I am going to revert
> > 75d22069e as well as my followup patches. If we don't want to
> > give up on that idea altogether, we have to find some way to
> > suppress the chatter from parallel workers. I wonder whether
> > it would be appropriate to go further than we have, and actively
> > delete placeholders that turn out to be within an extension's
> > reserved namespace. The core issue here is that workers don't
> > necessarily set GUCs and load extensions in the same order that
> > their parent did, so if we leave any invalid placeholders behind
> > after reserving an extension's prefix, we're risking issues
> > during worker start.
>
> Here's a delta patch (meant to be applied after reverting cab5b9ab2)
> that does things like that. It fixes the parallel-mode problem ...
> so do we want to tighten things up this much?
>
> regards, tom lan
>
Hello,
Thank you for taking care of the bug I introduced with 75d22069e,
I didn't notice this thread until now.
For what it's worth, I agree with throwing an ERROR if the placeholder is
unrecognized. Initially, I didn't want to change too much the liberty of
setting any
placeholder, but mainly to not go unnoticed.
In my humble opinion, I still think that this should go on and disallow
bogus placeholders as we do for postgres unrecognized settings.
I tested your delta patch with and without parallel mode, and, naturally,
it behaves correctly.
My 2 cents.
+1
Cheers,
Florin Irion
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey V. Lepikhov | 2022-02-18 11:50:54 | Re: Merging statistics from children instead of re-sampling everything |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-02-18 11:10:38 | Re: Failed transaction statistics to measure the logical replication progress |