Re: [HACKERS] Draft release notes for next week's back-branch releases
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Draft release notes for next week's back-branch releases |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19119.1494092309@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Draft release notes for next week's back-branchreleases (Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Draft release notes for next week's back-branchreleases
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Petr Jelinek <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 06/05/17 19:15, Tom Lane wrote: >> (Or, wait a minute. That documentation only applies to v10, but we >> need to be writing this relnote for 9.6 users. What terminology should >> we be using anyway?) > Yeah we need to somehow mention that it only affects 3rd party tools > using logical decoding. > "The initial snapshot created for a logical decoding slot was > potentially incorrect. This could allow the 3rd party tools using > the logical decoding to copy incomplete existing(?) data. This was > more likely to happen if the source server was busy at the time of > slot creation, or if two slots were created concurrently." >> Also, do we need to recommend that people not trust any logical replicas >> at this point, but recreate them after installing the update? > Yes, but only if there was preexisting data *and* there was concurrent > activity on the server when the "replication" was setup. OK, I can work with this. Thanks for the help! regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: