Re: cleanup patches for incremental backup

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: cleanup patches for incremental backup
Date: 2024-01-26 16:04:37
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZLXsorAX2XNxC1+zKFSagCZUk4Qiq49+WxTk8oePvWCQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 11:08 AM Nathan Bossart
<nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 10:06:41AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 2:39 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> That seems like a reasonable starting point. Even if it doesn't help
> >> determine the root cause, it should at least help rule out concurrent
> >> summary removal.
> >
> > Here is a patch for that.
>
> LGTM. The only thing I might add is the cutoff_time in that LOG.

Here is v2 with that addition.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-Temporary-patch-to-help-debug-pg_walsummary-test-.patch application/octet-stream 3.6 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2024-01-26 16:36:33 Re: Add SPLIT PARTITION/MERGE PARTITIONS commands
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2024-01-26 15:57:29 Re: MERGE ... WHEN NOT MATCHED BY SOURCE