Magnus Hagander wrote: > PFA a patch that fixes this. I think this is bugfix-for-backpatch, I don't > think it has a large risk of breaking things. Thoughts?
Agreed. As long as it doesn't show up as idle-in-transaction afterwards or something odd like that, it should be okay to backpatch. (I suppose there's no way for it to end as being in-transaction anyway.) -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
