Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dave Cramer
Subject Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762
Date
Msg-id CADK3HHJtd14MW5AV5sN+acxPP7Y4sVqUqhf141XbcG8j8d_mMw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 15:41, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 2020-Jun-24, Robert Haas wrote:

> So really I think this turns on #1: is it plausible
> that people are using this feature, however inadvertent it may be, and
> is it potentially useful? I don't see that anybody's made an argument
> against either of those things. Unless someone can do so, I think we
> shouldn't disable this.

People (specifically the jdbc driver) *are* using this feature in this
way, but they didn't realize they were doing it.  It was an accident and
they didn't notice.


Not sure we are using it as much as we accidently did it that way. It would be trivial to fix.

That said I think we should fix the security hole this opens and leave the functionality.

Dave

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762