| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Arseny Sher <a(dot)sher(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: DROP SUBSCRIPTION hangs if sub is disabled in the same transaction |
| Date: | 2017-09-16 12:52:46 |
| Message-ID: | b4c42958-e67f-fb12-28b1-2da55f3ef97d@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/15/17 13:35, Arseny Sher wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Here is a simple patch that fixes this, based on my original proposal
>> point #4.
>
> I checked, it passes the tests and solves the problem. However, isn't
> this
>
> + if (slotname || !subenabled)
>
> is a truism? Is it possible that subscription has no slot but still
> enabled?
Yeah, we could just remove the _at_commit() branch entirely. That would
effectively undo the change in 7e174fa793a2df89fe03d002a5087ef67abcdde8,
but I don't see any other choice for now. And the practical impact
would be quite limited.
> Besides, we can avoid stopping the workers if subscription has no
> associated replication origin, though this probably means that
> subscription was broken by user and is not worth it.
Right, it seems not worth addressing this case separately.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-09-16 13:00:48 | Re: psql: new help related to variables are not too readable |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-09-16 12:44:29 | Re: taking stdbool.h into use |