| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Non-superuser subscription owners |
| Date: | 2023-03-31 20:00:08 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaK2VnJWE34Rp_eBwKc95Ff5fCoU_3hz9H_a6g3fQmj0w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 9:49 PM houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com
<houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
> It looks like the super user check is out of a transaction, I haven't checked why
> it only failed on one BF animal, but it seems we can put the check into the
> transaction like the following:
That looks like a reasonable fix but I can't reproduce the problem
locally. I thought the reason why that machine sees the problem might
be that it uses -DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE, but I tried that option here
and the tests still pass. Anyone ideas how to reproduce?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2023-03-31 20:33:23 | Re: Making background psql nicer to use in tap tests |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-03-31 19:53:24 | Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys |