On 14/12/16 15:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 12/12/16 8:28 PM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>> On 13/12/16 02:00, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> On 2016-12-13 01:57:01 +0100, Petr Jelinek wrote:
>>>> I mentioned that as possible solution upthread, I am only worried that
>>>> the failure scenario is basically infinite loop.
>>>
>>> I don't see the problem with that. If you're really concerned you can
>>> set a statement timeout.
>>>
>>
>> Okay in case we decide it's the right way to go attached patch does
>> that. I also added some more tests based on your feedback while I am at it.
>
> This looks mostly reasonable to me, but the location and xid output from
> pg_logical_slot_get_changes() is not portable/repeatable, so it should
> be omitted from the output.
>
Sigh, yes you are right.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
