Re: Heads up: 7.3.3 this Wednesday

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)cbbrowne(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Heads up: 7.3.3 this Wednesday
Date: 2003-05-21 17:40:02
Message-ID: 8148.1053538802@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> writes:
> Yes, 3 weeks of testing with the patch that Jan provided for 7.2. We
> had no failures that I know of. It provided no measurable
> performance gain, but it also never deadlocked, and we tested under
> conditions where it sometimes did in the past.

> Note, however, that we were testing it indirectly; that is, while we
> were testing to see if it would break, our application (which does a
> number of the referential checks itself, multiple-connection-safety
> notwithstanding :( ) tends not to try to violate the foreign keys
> anyway. I wouldn't want to claim that we've tested it real heavily.

Nonetheless, this does seem to speak to my real concern, which is
whether the patch introduces any unexpected side-effects. The code
was getting executed, whether or not it detected any FK violations,
so we can have some hope that any bizarre problems would have been
noticed.

I'll go ahead and apply it for 7.3.3.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Darko Prenosil 2003-05-21 18:08:29 Re: [HACKERS] about NULL
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-05-21 16:42:35 Re: Pruning useless tables for queries

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2003-05-21 20:52:04 Re: Heads up: 7.3.3 this Wednesday
Previous Message Fernando Nasser 2003-05-21 16:35:39 JDBC: Wrong type