Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cGWLh-0005uo-Ek for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:33:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cGWLh-0004CK-1i for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:33:21 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cGWLT-0003xR-Ds for pgsql-committers@postgresql.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:33:07 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cGWLQ-0007Df-Rz for pgsql-committers@postgresql.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:33:06 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uBCJWvw4022908; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 14:32:57 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Petr Jelinek cc: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-committers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: pgsql: Add support for temporary replication slots In-reply-to: <62935e6f-4f1b-c433-e0fa-7f936a38b3e5@2ndquadrant.com> References: <27274.1481557380@sss.pgh.pa.us> <27833.1481558144@sss.pgh.pa.us> <62935e6f-4f1b-c433-e0fa-7f936a38b3e5@2ndquadrant.com> Comments: In-reply-to Petr Jelinek message dated "Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:47:53 +0100" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <22906.1481571177.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 14:32:57 -0500 Message-ID: <22907.1481571177@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-committers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-committers-owner@postgresql.org Petr Jelinek writes: > Yes you are correct, we tried naively to first drop another slot in > hopes that it will give the other backend enough time to close, but > apparently that wasn't robust enough for slower machines. > Attached is the fixed test using the loop from test_extensions (and yes > I would have missed the pg_stat_clear_snapshot() call without the hint, > thanks :) ). Pushed, thanks. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers