Re: Have pg_basebackup write "dbname" in "primary_conninfo"?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Have pg_basebackup write "dbname" in "primary_conninfo"? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaLRCcCeY3_n7h0rw-r-UfJt_GiFZiJQ1pFZ-iQNUozug@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Have pg_basebackup write "dbname" in "primary_conninfo"? ("Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
RE: Have pg_basebackup write "dbname" in "primary_conninfo"?
Re: Have pg_basebackup write "dbname" in "primary_conninfo"? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 5:58 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Seems weird to me. You don't use dbname=replication to ask for a > > replication connection, so why would we ever end up with that > > anywhere? And especially in only one of two such closely related > > cases? > > Just FYI - here is an extreme case. And note that I have applied proposed patch. > > When `pg_basebackup -D data_N2 -R` is used: > ``` > primary_conninfo = 'user=hayato ... dbname=hayato ... > ``` > > But when `pg_basebackup -d "" -D data_N2 -R` is used: > ``` > primary_conninfo = 'user=hayato ... dbname=replication > ``` It seems like maybe somebody should look into why this is happening, and perhaps fix it. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: