| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 'Paul A Jungwirth' <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, Mutaamba Maasha <maasha(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ReplicationSlotRelease() crashes when the instance is in the single user mode |
| Date: | 2025-08-20 08:02:26 |
| Message-ID: | aKWBEt6QVPWQERXN@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 07:42:11AM +0000, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
> Let me clarify your point. For now, there are no decisions to prohibit origin
> manipulations. 0002 only restricts to handle slots in the single-user mode. Did
> you say that we do not have to do tests to ensure these SQL functions are
> prohibited in the mode?
I am saying that there is little point in having tests for the origin
functions in single-user mode as these don't do anything really
fancy with global states (there's a acquired_by of course, and no
specific IsUnderPostmaster patch), contrary to the replication slots.
I am not convinced that there is any need to restrict them, either.
If somebody shows a reason to justify such a move, we could argue
about it, of course.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chao Li | 2025-08-20 08:14:15 | Re: Remove traces of long in dynahash.c |
| Previous Message | Yugo Nagata | 2025-08-20 08:01:56 | Re: Prevent internal error at concurrent CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION |