Re: Postmaster holding unlinked files for pg_largeobject table

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kevin(dot)grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, alexk <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Alexander Shulgin <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postmaster holding unlinked files for pg_largeobject table
Date: 2011-06-09 18:49:23
Message-ID: BANLkTikPH4ws9XtYn+RhCHE1t5QXPKVkFQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié jun 08 14:28:02 -0400 2011:
>>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>>> This customer is running on 8.4 so I started from there; should I
>>>> backpatch this to 8.2, or not at all?
>
>>> I'm not excited about back-patching it...
>
>> Bummer.
>
> Well, of course mine is only one opinion; anybody else feel this *is*
> worth risking a back-patch for?
>
> My thought is that it needs some beta testing.  Perhaps it'd be sane to
> push it into beta2 now, and then back-patch sometime after 9.1 final,
> if no problems pop up.

I think it'd be sensible to back-patch it. I'm not sure whether now
or later. It's a bug fix that is biting real users in the field, so
it seems like we ought to do something about it.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-06-09 19:02:33 Re: Postmaster holding unlinked files for pg_largeobject table
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-06-09 18:45:31 Re: Postmaster holding unlinked files for pg_largeobject table

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-06-09 18:58:40 Re: Invalid byte sequence for encoding "UTF8", caused due to non wide-char-aware downcase_truncate_identifier() function on WINDOWS
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-06-09 18:45:31 Re: Postmaster holding unlinked files for pg_largeobject table