On 9/26/16 8:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think that it's 100% pointless for get_control_dbstate
> to be worried about transient CRC failures. If writes to pg_control
> aren't atomic then we have problems enormously larger than whether
> "pg_ctl promote" throws an error or not.
The new code was
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Coverity thinks that this patch introduced a bunch of
>> null-pointer-dereference hazards, and AFAICS it is right.
>> The change in get_controlfile()'s API is completely
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> pg_ctl: Detect current standby state from pg_control
>
> Coverity thinks that this patch introduced a bunch of
> null-pointer-dereference hazards, and AFAICS it is right.
> The
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> pg_ctl: Detect current standby state from pg_control
Coverity thinks that this patch introduced a bunch of
null-pointer-dereference hazards, and AFAICS it is right.
The change in get_controlfile()'s API is completely broken
and needs to be undone.