| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hiroyuki Yamada <yamada(at)kokolink(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: alpha3 release schedule? |
| Date: | 2009-12-19 16:54:02 |
| Message-ID: | 11468.1261241642@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hiroyuki Yamada <yamada(at)kokolink(dot)net> writes:
> Well, I want to know whether the problem I refered to
> in http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-12/msg01641.php
> is must-fix or not.
> This problem is a corollary of the deadlock problem. This is less catstrophic
> but more likely to happen.
> If you leave this problem, for example, any long-running transactions,
> holding any cursors in whatever tables, have a possibility of freezing
> whole recovery work in HotStandby node until the transaction commit.
Seems like something we should fix ASAP, but I do not see why it need
hold up an alpha release. Alpha releases are expected to have bugs,
and this one doesn't look like it would stop people from finding
other bugs.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2009-12-19 17:12:22 | Re: alpha3 release schedule? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-19 16:36:42 | Re: no lo_import(text, oid) document |