On 6 April 2016 at 15:29, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2016-04-06 10:24:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > > On 2016-04-06 10:15:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > >> Well, that's something worth thinking about. I assume that > > >> pg_logical_slot_get_changes could be executed in a database different > from > > >> the one where a change was originated? > > > > > You can execute it, but you'll get an error: > > > > Oh good. I was afraid we had an unrecognized can o' worms here. > > As posted nearby, there's a hole in that defense; for the messages > only. Pretty easy to solve though. >
My instinct was to put in a test for non-ascii text; even if we can't keep that test, it has highlighted a hole we wouldn't have spotted for a while, so I'll call that "good catch" then. Perhaps easy to solve, but how do we test it is solved? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
