Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Grigory Smolkin
Subject Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.
Date
Msg-id c3f1c0f6-5e57-9b47-7dff-a21e760920b8@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to BUG #16159: recovery requests WALs for the next timelines before timeline switch LSN has been reached  (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-bugs

I`ve bumped into this issue recently:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/dd6690b0-ec03-6b3c-6fac-c963f91f87a7%40postgrespro.ru


On 4/6/20 8:43 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:

The patch looks good to me. Attached is the updated version of the patch.
I updated only comments.

Barring any objection, I will commit this patch.

I`ve been running tests on your patch. So far so good.

On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 12:15:00PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
I understood the situation and am fine to back-patch that. But I'm not sure
if it's fair to do that. Maybe we need to hear more opinions about this?
OTOH, feature freeze for v13 is today, so what about committing the patch
in v13 at first, and then doing the back-patch after hearing opinions and
receiving many +1?

+1 to back-patching it.

-- 
Grigory Smolkin
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #16325: Assert failure on partitioning by int for a textvalue with a collation
Next
From: Euler Taveira
Date:
Subject: Re: [bug] Wrong bool value parameter