Re: pg_listener table errors with slony
От | Guillaume Lelarge |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_listener table errors with slony |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D375A67.8050207@lelarge.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_listener table errors with slony (Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_listener table errors with slony
Re: pg_listener table errors with slony |
Список | pgadmin-support |
Le 19/01/2011 22:33, Dave Page a écrit : > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> Le 19/01/2011 22:23, Dave Page a écrit : >>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>>> Le 14/01/2011 00:27, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit : >>>>> Le 14/01/2011 00:09, Ben Carbery a écrit : >>>>>> [...] >>>>>> I am using slony 2.06 on a pg 9.0.2 installation with pgadmin 12.2.2. >>>>>> Whenever I click on certain elements of the object browser associated with >>>>>> replication I get an error: >>>>>> >>>>>> ERROR: relation pg_listener does not exist >>>>>> LINE 1: SELECT listenerpid FROM pg_listener WHERE relname = '... >>>>>> >>>>>> This occur under Replication-><cluster name> for example or when clicking on >>>>>> nodes under that. This also occurs on 12.2.1. >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe this table no longer exists in 9.0 so I guess this is technically >>>>>> a bug. Should it be logged as such? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well, pgAdmin fires this query. As you say, this table no longer exists >>>>> since the rework on the listen/notify mechanism done for 9.0. So, yeah, >>>>> this is a bug in pgAdmin. >>>>> >>>>> I'll try to work on this tomorrow. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Got a look at this, and I reproduce the error. I don't think we have any >>>> support of Slony 2.0. >>> >>> We did. >>> >> >> We had 1.2 support. To have 2.0, we would have to get rid of the >> sl_trigger checks. Or was it dropped along the way of 2.0? > > No idea - I just recall Sachin working on compatibility, and that was > one of/the patch he came of with. > Yeah, you're right. I now see the commit. Which means we have two bugs on 2.0 support. > FWIW, I'd be happy to drop support. I don't think many people use it, > and it certainly doesn't get tested enough. I kind of agree for it not being tested enough. > Plus, it's just one of many replication engines. > This isn't a good reason to me. I would like to see something alike for SR. -- Guillaumehttp://www.postgresql.frhttp://dalibo.com
В списке pgadmin-support по дате отправления: