From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Asif Naeem <anaeem(dot)it(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade failure on Windows Server |
Date: | 2015-01-22 16:24:31 |
Message-ID: | 20150122162431.GB27749@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 09:01:39AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > The
> > Windows-specif code we do carry is required and was developed by people
> > that are no longer as involved.
> >
>
> I have seen many a times that once committer's (those who are not generally
> involved in Windows development) get reasonable confidence about patch
> and the review done for the same, they commit the patch. It happens both
> for the patches where I was Author and where I was Reviewer, although I
> agree that it takes more time.
Here is Windows change to properly detach the server process that never
got implemented as no Windows expert developed or tested a patch, but
test code was posted:
Here is another unapplied Windows patch for preventing Control-C from
closing the server:
Again, I would love to say we handle Windows patches well, but we don't.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-01-22 16:26:57 | Re: pg_upgrade failure on Windows Server |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-01-22 15:18:23 | Re: BUG #12617: DETAIL: Could not read from file "pg_subtrans/06F8" at offset 90112: Success. |