On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:35:43AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> hubert depesz lubaczewski <dep...@depesz.com> writes:
> > On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 02:27:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> It's not just the port, it's all the connection parameters ---
> >> do_connect relies on the PGconn object to remember those, and in this
> >> case there no longer is a PGconn object.
> >>
> >> We could have psql keep that information separately, but I'm not sure
> >> it's really worth the trouble.
>
> > well, I think it's definitely worth the trouble.
>
> [ shrug.. ] So submit a patch. Personally I don't think the case comes
way above my skillset :(
> up often enough to be worth the trouble, and I'd much rather spend
> development time on preventing the server from crashing in the first
> place.
the reason for the crash is discussed in the pg_upgrade thread on
hackers. ( 8.3 ltree + pg_upgrade to 9.0.5 == backend crash on select).
Best regards,
depesz
--
The best thing about modern society is how easy it is to avoid contact with it.
http://depesz.com/
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
