On 2017-06-07 20:31, Robert Haas wrote:
> [...]
>
> [ Side note: Erik's report on this thread initially seemed to suggest
> that we needed this patch to make logical decoding stable. But my
> impression is that this is belied by subsequent developments on other
> threads, so my theory is that this patch was never really related to
> the problem, but rather than by the time Erik got around to testing
> this patch, other fixes had made the problems relatively rare, and the
> apparently-improved results with this patch were just chance. If that
> theory is wrong, it would be good to hear about it. ]
Yes, agreed; I was probably mistaken.
