| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Creating a DSA area to provide work space for parallel execution |
| Date: | 2016-12-16 17:32:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY6i4ewV0B50+2xmfC55SvVQ7EcKzsUj2Q4uzFTC3vL=g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2016-12-16 11:41:49 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Thoughts?
>>
>> Hearing no objections, I've gone ahead and committed this. If that
>> makes somebody really unhappy I can revert it, but I am betting that
>> the real story is that nobody cares about preserving T_ID().
>
> I don't care about T_ID, but I do care about breaking extensions using
> lwlocks like for the 3rd release in a row or such. This is getting a
> bit ridiculous.
Hmm, I hadn't thought about that. :-)
I guess we could put back array_base/array_stride and just ignore
them, but that hardly seems better. Then we're stuck with that wart
forever.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-12-16 17:33:11 | Re: Creating a DSA area to provide work space for parallel execution |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-12-16 17:28:35 | Re: Creating a DSA area to provide work space for parallel execution |