| From: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Jeff Davis' <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>, Ajin Cherian <itsajin(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: Bug in ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... SERVER / ... CONNECTION with broken old server |
| Date: | 2026-06-24 02:18:20 |
| Message-ID: | OS9PR01MB12149873B1F63BDBB3E5012CAF5ED2@OS9PR01MB12149.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Jeff,
I went through the 0003 patch. Apart from HINT message, I found that error code
ERRCODE_CONNECTION_FAILURE is always used. Should we report the original errcode
of the root cause? Or it's OK because the observed outcome is the cannot-connect
error?
Another comment:
```
+ conninfo = ForeignServerConnectionString(subowner, server);
+ Assert(conninfo != NULL);
```
Do we have to consider the case that ForeignServerConnectionString() returns NULL
without any ERRORs? For the production build, the Assert() would be skipped and
the segmentation fault would happen in the `if (!conninfo)` part.
I checked the doc [1] but there are no specifications for it.
Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sungwoo Chang | 2026-06-24 02:25:15 | Re: Fwd: dsm_registry: Add detach and destroy features |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2026-06-24 01:15:10 | Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations |