From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: MultiXact member wraparound protections are now enabled |
Date: | 2015-07-25 02:22:14 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY_Lyz9b-WMimbaBWnK=eVp+7+DQnd0c++0kBGQYFtaUQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On 7/22/15 4:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> But it seemed to me that this could be rather confusing. I thought it
>> would be better to be explicit about whether the protections are
>> enabled in all cases. That way, (1) if you see the message saying
>> they are enabled, they are enabled; (2) if you see the message saying
>> they are disabled, they are disabled; and (3) if you see neither
>> message, your version does not have those protections.
>
> But this is not documented, AFAICT, so I don't think anyone is going to
> be able to follow that logic. I don't see anything in the release notes
> saying, look for this message to see how this applies to you, or whatever.
Good point. I can't tell you what the right thing to do is, and I'm
sure there is room for debate about that. I'm only telling you why I
did what I did.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-07-25 04:42:03 | Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-07-25 01:50:42 | Re: pg_dump -Fd and compression level |