| From: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Hubert Lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Segfault when restoring -Fd dump on current HEAD |
| Date: | 2019-02-26 08:13:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+q6zcUUiZLFOiY_gZ4mbsUfCkQOE=ab3hcCW+vXrjKrW-RDPQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:38 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> Works for me. With a quick read of the code, it seems to me that it
> is possible to keep compatibility while keeping the simplifications
> around ArchiveEntry()'s refactoring.
Yes, it should be rather simple, we can e.g. return to the old less consistent
NULL handling approach something (like in the attached patch), or replace a NULL
value with an empty string in WriteToc. Give me a moment, I'll check it out. At
the same time I would suggest to keep replace_line_endings -> sanitize_line,
since it doesn't break compatibility.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| archive_entry_null_handling.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nagaura, Ryohei | 2019-02-26 08:15:50 | RE: Timeout parameters |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-02-26 08:12:55 | Re: BUG #15589: Due to missing wal, restore ends prematurely and opens database for read/write |