Message-ID: <5438ebe33bce797e5ffe24eaca81f1d130af9617.camel@j-davis.com>
Subject: Re: [16+] subscription can end up in inconsistent state
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila
 <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,  pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 13:55:28 -0800
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALDaNm2L9uDP3HsgSiBUGQWQAxVviA_BdcTHRUUiXTDJMpKD1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e5892973ae2a80a1a3e0266806640dae3c428100.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <CAA4eK1LJEMfdxpV7xDhR3qOFoSt3LuKbbu5kRMBfYJ2imT8Few@mail.gmail.com>
	 <5dff4caf26f45ce224a33a5e18e110b93a351b2f.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <CALDaNm0fJ8dibhG-2sVKJaLP8pz-2T1o9epPvcdpb9FHyhn3gg@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CA+TgmoYy7Z=x+yaK1ugDqrUuMUNWcJkZdVF4E_+3L0tcmopcTA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALDaNm06nUm0URSYiduxi3VqdWZ=Swv4T8x0exHTr-aHMb4e+w@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALDaNm1A50g3x+hiRT8UjPK3oETFtabTm=W-AhruHeNKh0Uz=Q@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CAHut+PsQBUGhPVTYRpGE8wogS5xbSouecGSCDdha-Bd-PP22ag@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALDaNm3jbhVzT5XbBrU1=JfospGKz65a9mxJccR5O=c3Z13qjA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CAHut+Pteo8qtXwEGNy42s2S-O=CU2wSZAicYd1bKn5TOTJyKWg@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CALDaNm2L9uDP3HsgSiBUGQWQAxVviA_BdcTHRUUiXTDJMpKD1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4-0ubuntu2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5438ebe33bce797e5ffe24eaca81f1d130af9617.camel%40j-davis.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2023-11-27 at 10:26 +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> The patch was not applying on HEAD because of recent commits, the
> attached v6 version patch is rebased on top of HEAD.

Thank you, committed with minor modifications.

I decided to do:

   libpqrcv_check_conninfo(conninfo, must_use_password);

rather than:

   if (must_use_password)                                            =20
      libpqrcv_check_conninfo(conninfo, true);

because if there's some parsing error then we wouldn't like it to be
conditional on must_use_password. Of course, there should not be any
parsing error because it was already validated at DDL time, but in case
there's another way to get into an inconsistent state, we might as well
re-validate here.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis