| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4 |
| Date: | 2010-03-13 23:29:54 |
| Message-ID: | 4B9C1FF2.1050007@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
> It's also my 3rd choice of solution behind fine-grained lock conflicts
> (1st) which would avoid many issues and master/standby in lock step
> (2nd).
Yeah, I just can't imagine you hunting down all of the corner cases for
fine-grained lock conflicts in time for 9.0. Given what I've been
looking at, it seems like a LOT of work.
--Josh Berkus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-03-14 07:52:44 | Re: [BUGS] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-03-13 22:24:44 | Re: BUG #5362: WARNING could not determine encoding |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-03-14 07:52:44 | Re: [BUGS] PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4 |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-03-13 21:24:08 | Re: PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag error on 9.0 alpha 4 |