Re: Segfault logical replication PG 10.4 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Segfault logical replication PG 10.4
Date
Msg-id 27618.1531926232@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Segfault logical replication PG 10.4  (Mai Peng <maily.peng@webedia-group.com>)
Responses Re: Segfault logical replication PG 10.4
List pgsql-hackers
Mai Peng <maily.peng@webedia-group.com> writes:
> Here the backtrace

Hmm .. so this can be summarized as "logical replication workers should
provide an ActiveSnapshot in case the user functions they call want one".
Makes me wonder how much other transactional infrastructure is needed
but not present.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Make foo=null a warning by default.