On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:57 PM Pierre Ducroquet <p.p...@pinaraf.info> wrote: > > On Monday, January 6, 2020 6:57:33 PM CET Tom Lane wrote: > > Pierre Ducroquet <p.p...@pinaraf.info> writes: > > > Attached to this email is a patch with better comments regarding the > > > XLogSendLogical change. > > > > Hi, > > This patch entirely fails to apply for me (and for the cfbot too). > > It looks like (a) it's missing a final newline and (b) all the tabs > > have been mangled into spaces, and not correctly mangled either. > > I could probably reconstruct a workable patch if I had to, but > > it seems likely that it'd be easier for you to resend it with a > > little more care about attaching an unmodified attachment. > > > > As for the question of back-patching, it seems to me that it'd > > likely be reasonable to put this into v12, but probably not > > further back. There will be no interest in back-patching > > commit cfdf4dc4f, and it seems like the argument for this > > patch is relatively weak without that. > > > > regards, tom lane > > Hi > > My deepest apologies for the patch being broken, I messed up when transferring > it between my computers after altering the comments. The verbatim one attached > to this email applies with no issue on current HEAD. > The patch regarding PostmasterIsAlive is completely pointless since v12 where > the function was rewritten, and was included only to help reproduce the issue > on older versions. Back-patching the walsender patch further than v12 would > imply back-patching all the machinery introduced for PostmasterIsAlive > (9f09529952) or another intrusive change there, a too big risk indeed.
+1, backpatch to v12 looks sensible.