Re: Re: pg15 beta2 bug:cause by logcial replation
От | 396934406@qq.com |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: pg15 beta2 bug:cause by logcial replation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | tencent_55711625EE6D7ABE290E862525EB956B0508@qq.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | pg15 beta2 bug:cause by logcial replation ("396934406@qq.com" <396934406@qq.com>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Obviously in the same pg server pg15 beta2, because my
subscriber creation use "create_slot='false'", another clue is i use "\c", all the test on the same cluster.
396934406@qq.com
"houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com> writes:> On Friday, July 1, 2022 11:35 AM 396934406@qq.com <396934406@qq.com> wrote:>> ERROR: could not receive list of replicated tables from the publisher: ERROR: column t.attnames does not exist>> LINE 2: , t.attnames> Just to confirm, did you use the PG15 beta1 or earlier PG15 version> as the publisher and use PG15 beta2 as the subscriber ?It looks to me like this was an attempt to replicate from 15beta1 to15beta2, which would fail because commit fd0b9dceb imagines that anyserver reporting version >= 15 will have pg_publication_tables.attnames,even though that column was not there in beta1.I bitched about the ill-timing of that schema change at the timebut was outvoted. At this point I think it's water over the dam.We could perhaps change that test in fetch_table_list(), but it'drequire access to the source server's catversion, which I don't thinkis readily available. In any case, by the time we could provide a fixit'd be useless to testers of beta1; they'd have updated already bysome other method.regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: