On 04.09.2012 17:34, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 04.09.2012 16:50, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh Berkus<josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>>> Heikki,
>>>> It is for 9.2. I'll do a little bit more testing, and barring any
>>>> issues, commit the patch. What exactly is the schedule? Do we need
>>>> to do
>>>> a RC2 because of this?
>>
>>> We're currently scheduled to release next week. If we need to do an
>>> RC2, we're going to have to do some fast rescheduling; we've already
>>> started the publicity machine.
>>
>> At this point I would argue that the only thing that should abort the
>> launch is a bad regression. Minor bugs in new features (and this must
>> be minor if it wasn't noticed before) don't qualify.
>>
>> Having said that, it'd be good to get it fixed if we can. The schedule
>> says to wrap 9.2.0 Thursday evening --- Heikki, can you get this fixed
>> tomorrow (Wednesday)?
>
> The attached patch fixes it for me. It fixes the original problem, by
> adding the missing locking and terminating walsenders on a target
> timeline change, and also changes the behavior wrt. WAL segments
> restored from the archive, as I just suggested in another email
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-09/msg00206.php).
Committed that.
- Heikki
