Re: ReadBuffer(P_NEW) versus valid buffers

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ReadBuffer(P_NEW) versus valid buffers
Date: 2006-09-24 03:17:44
Message-ID: 4515F8D8.9090005@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> writes:
>> The check looks good - are we chasing up the Linux kernel (or Suse) guys
>> to get the bug investigated?
>
> I asked around inside Red Hat but haven't gotten any responses yet ...
> seeing that it's a rather old Suse kernel, I can understand that RH's
> kernel hackers might not be too excited about investigating. (Alan Cox,
> for one, has got other things to worry about this weekend:
> http://zeniv.linux.org.uk/%7etelsa/boom/

Uhmm... doh?

Joshua D. Drake

>
> I believe Dan's busy updating his kernel --- if a current Suse kernel
> still shows the problem then he should definitely file a bug with them.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jie Zhang 2006-09-24 03:25:38 Re: Bitmap index status
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-09-24 02:24:25 Re: Buildfarm alarms