From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Asim Praveen <apraveen(at)pivotal(dot)io>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |
Date: | 2018-11-08 18:07:29 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYiiuA=JFCp+bbjkQR_hhzB2a8XEJ51pc-7vkeY8fsLRQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 9:41 PM Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> My plan is do a round of testing and review of this stuff next week
> once the dust is settled on the current minor releases (including
> fixing a few typos I just spotted and some word-smithing). All going
> well, I will then push the resulting patches to master and all
> supported stable branches, unless other reviews or objections appear.
> At some point not too far down the track I hope to be ready to
> consider committing that other patch that will completely change all
> of this code in the master branch, but in any case Craig's patch will
> get almost a full minor release cycle to sit in the stable branches
> before release.
I did a read-through of these patches.
+ new_requests = entry->requests[forknum];
+ entry->requests[forknum] =
+ bms_join(new_requests, requests);
What happens if bms_join fails, too?
+ recover from the WAL after any failure is reported, preferrably
preferably.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-11-08 19:05:59 | Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-11-08 17:57:55 | Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent? |