Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20200624194114.GA3886@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762 (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762
Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762 Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: