Re: 9a57858f1103b89a5674f0d50c5fe1f756411df6

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jozef Mlich <jmlich(at)redhat(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 9a57858f1103b89a5674f0d50c5fe1f756411df6
Date: 2014-03-14 19:51:15
Message-ID: 53235DB3.7060804@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro, All:

Can someone help me with what we should tell users about this issue?

1. What users are especially likely to encounter it? All replication
users, or do they have to do something else?

2. What error messages will affected users get? A link to the reports
of this issue on pgsql lists would tell me this, but I'm not sure
exactly which error reports are associated.

3. If users have already encountered corruption due to the fixed issue,
what do they need to do after updating? re-basebackup?

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2014-03-14 20:01:42 Re: Auto-tuning work_mem and maintenance_work_mem
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2014-03-14 19:45:09 Re: jsonb and nested hstore