On 9/15/17 13:35, Arseny Sher wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >> Here is a simple patch that fixes this, based on my original proposal >> point #4. > > I checked, it passes the tests and solves the problem. However, isn't > this > > + if (slotname || !subenabled) > > is a truism? Is it possible that subscription has no slot but still > enabled?
Yeah, we could just remove the _at_commit() branch entirely. That would effectively undo the change in 7e174fa793a2df89fe03d002a5087ef67abcdde8, but I don't see any other choice for now. And the practical impact would be quite limited. > Besides, we can avoid stopping the workers if subscription has no > associated replication origin, though this probably means that > subscription was broken by user and is not worth it. Right, it seems not worth addressing this case separately. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
