On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2013-06-14 04:56:15 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: >> > * Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > On 2013-06-12 07:53:29 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> >> The attached patch fixes this problem. It just changes walsender so >> >> >> that it >> >> >> waits for all the outstanding WAL records to be replicated to the >> >> >> standby >> >> >> before closing the replication connection. >> >> > >> >> > Imo this is a fix that needs to get backpatched... The code tried to do >> >> > this but failed, I don't think it really gives grounds for valid *new* >> >> > concerns. >> >> >> >> +1 (without having looked at the code itself, it's definitely a >> >> behaviour that needs to be fixed) >> > >> > Yea, I was also thinking it would be reasonable to backpatch this; it >> > really looks like a bug that we're allowing this to happen today. >> > >> > So, +1 on a backpatch for me. >> >> +1. I think that we can backpatch to 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3. > > I marked the patch as ready for committer.
Committed. Thanks a lot! Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
