From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | DROP SUBSCRIPTION with no slot |
Date: | 2019-09-24 14:31:02 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1zOWyYzNCzNLN9MvqnnrVGXZfTNe1dZ0Gh+6XkT8d8X2Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I recently had to cut loose (pg_drop_replication_slot) a logical replica
that couldn't keep up and so was threatening to bring down the master.
In mopping up on the replica side, I couldn't just drop the subscription,
because it couldn't drop the nonexistent slot on the master and so refused
to work. So I had to do a silly little dance where I first disable the
subscription, then ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SET (slot_name = NONE), then drop
it.
Wanting to clean up after itself is admirable, but if there is nothing to
clean up, why should that be an error condition? Should this be an item on
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo (to whatever extent that is still
used).
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-09-24 15:13:07 | Re: PostgreSQL12 and older versions of OpenSSL |
Previous Message | Nikolay Shaplov | 2019-09-24 13:49:11 | Re: [PATCH] src/test/modules/dummy_index -- way to test reloptions from inside of access method |