From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: The buildfarm is in a pretty bad way, folks |
Date: | 2018-04-06 21:32:30 |
Message-ID: | 20180406213230.vumcoqrtnohlrhuc@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> It sure looks like there's been a frantic push to commit stuff that
> maybe wasn't quite fully baked. I'm not terribly on board with that,
> because it's likely to be hard to disentangle who broke what.
> But in particular, it's clear that partition_prune and
> isolation/checksum_cancel are showing big problems.
The partition_prune failure is clearly a minor portability issue which
I'll investigate after I pick up the kids. From where I sit, if we let
that patch bake any more, it will burn in the oven.
Partition prune also broke the sepgsql test also -- I think because one
partition is no longer scanned. Seems a reasonable thing to me, just
need to update the expected file. But I'll look closer.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-04-06 21:33:48 | Re: Online enabling of checksums |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-04-06 21:29:17 | Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning |