| 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 17:33:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZx197tRkR21nCKMnemJVz0z+CPxuC7BR9FZJPS5TYGhQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 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. :-)
Err, that was supposed to be :-( As in sad, not happy.
> 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 | David G. Johnston | 2016-12-16 17:33:19 | Re: PSQL commands: \quit_if, \quit_unless |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-12-16 17:32:49 | Re: Creating a DSA area to provide work space for parallel execution |