| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade should truncate/remove its logs before running |
| Date: | 2022-02-07 00:47:32 |
| Message-ID: | 0623B782-3EDE-415D-9D86-7F495D23CCB6@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Feb 6, 2022, at 7:39 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
>>> On Sun, Feb 06, 2022 at 08:32:59AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> But the commit really shouldn't have happened until we know that most
>>> buildfarm owners have installed it. It should have waited wait not just
>>> for the release but for widespread deployment. Otherwise we will just
>>> lose any logging for an error that might appear.
>
>> Would it be better if I just revert the change for now then and do it
>> again in one/two weeks?
>
> I don't see a need to revert it.
>
> I note, though, that there's still not been any email to the buildfarm
> owners list about this update.
>
>
It’s stuck in moderation
Cheers
Andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2022-02-07 01:01:02 | 2022-02-10 release announcement draft |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-02-07 00:39:39 | Re: pg_upgrade should truncate/remove its logs before running |