| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jerry Sievers <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SegFault on 9.6.14 |
| Date: | 2019-08-14 04:52:18 |
| Message-ID: | 11301.1565758338@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Another point which I am wondering is why can't we use the existing
> REWIND flag to solve the current issue, basically if we have access to
> that information in nodeLimit.c (ExecLimit), then can't we just pass
> down that to ExecShutdownNode?
The existing REWIND flag tells subnodes whether they should *optimize*
for getting rewound or not. I don't recall right now (well past
midnight) why that seemed like a useful definition, but if you grep for
places that are paying attention to that flag, I'm sure you'll find out.
We probably don't want to give up that distinction --- if it had been
equally good to define the flag as a hard yes-or-no, I'm sure we would
have taken that definition, because it's simpler.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-08-14 04:53:31 | Re: clean up obsolete initdb locale handling |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2019-08-14 04:42:17 | Re: SegFault on 9.6.14 |