On 9/15/17 13:35, Arseny Sher wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.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
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
