Le dimanche 21 juillet 2024, 07:39:13 UTC+2 Tom Lane a écrit :
> Fujii Masao writes:
> >> Le mercredi 6 mars 2024, 20:28:44 CET Stephen Frost a écrit :
> >>> I agree that this would generally be a useful thing to have.
>
Sorry for the late reply, as I was not available during the late summer.
>
Fujii Masao writes:
>> Le mercredi 6 mars 2024, 20:28:44 CET Stephen Frost a écrit :
>>> I agree that this would generally be a useful thing to have.
Personally, I want to push back on whether this has any legitimate
use-case. Even if the FSM is corrupt, it should self-heal over
time, and I'm no
On 2024/03/07 16:59, Ronan Dunklau wrote:
Le mercredi 6 mars 2024, 20:28:44 CET Stephen Frost a écrit :
I agree that this would generally be a useful thing to have.
Thanks !
Does that seem correct ?
Definitely needs to have a 'REVOKE ALL ON FUNCTION' at the end of the
upgrade script,
Le mercredi 6 mars 2024, 20:28:44 CET Stephen Frost a écrit :
> I agree that this would generally be a useful thing to have.
Thanks !
>
> > Does that seem correct ?
>
> Definitely needs to have a 'REVOKE ALL ON FUNCTION' at the end of the
> upgrade script, similar to what you'll find at the bot
Greetings,
* Ronan Dunklau (ronan.dunk...@aiven.io) wrote:
> As we are currently experiencing a FSM corruption issue [1], we need to
> rebuild FSM when we detect it.
Ideally, we'd figure out a way to pick up on this and address it without
the user needing to intervene, however ...
> I noticed
