| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
| Date: | 2010-01-31 19:42:55 |
| Message-ID: | 1264966975.13782.8417.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2010-01-31 at 14:07 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > The commit is a one line change, with parameter to control it, discussed
> > by Heikki and myself in December 2008. I stand by the accuracy of the
> > change; the parameter is really to ensure we can test during beta.
>
> Well, I was waiting to see if anyone else had an opinion, but: my
> opinion is that a GUC is not appropriate here. Either test it yourself
> enough to be sure it's a win, or don't put it in.
I will remove the parameter then, keeping the augmentation. That OK?
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2010-01-31 19:48:25 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-31 19:07:47 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Augment WAL records for btree delete with GetOldestXmin() to |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-31 19:44:07 | Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-31 19:35:49 | Re: Hot Standby and VACUUM FULL |