Hi, On 2017-06-29 20:07:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I was able to make the hang go away by means of the attached patch that > allows WalSndWaitForWal to exit early if the client has shut down the > COPY. However, since that function is miserably underdocumented (like > most of this code :-(), I have little idea if this is correct or safe.
Seems reasonable to me. > I also wonder why WalSndWaitForWal is being called for WAL that seemingly > doesn't exist yet, and whether that doesn't indicate another bug somewhere > in this stack. That's pretty normal - we can only send back something once a transaction is complete, and until that happens we'll just block waiting for more WAL. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
