Petr Jelinek <petr.jeli...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 06/05/17 19:15, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (Or, wait a minute. That documentation only applies to v10, but we
>> need to be writing this relnote for 9.6 users. What terminology should
>> we be using anyway?)
> Yeah we need to somehow mention that it only affects 3rd party tools
> using logical decoding.
> "The initial snapshot created for a logical decoding slot was
> potentially incorrect. This could allow the 3rd party tools using
> the logical decoding to copy incomplete existing(?) data. This was
> more likely to happen if the source server was busy at the time of
> slot creation, or if two slots were created concurrently."
>> Also, do we need to recommend that people not trust any logical replicas
>> at this point, but recreate them after installing the update?
> Yes, but only if there was preexisting data *and* there was concurrent
> activity on the server when the "replication" was setup.
OK, I can work with this. Thanks for the help!
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
