From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_archivecleanup bug |
Date: | 2014-03-18 18:11:30 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nM+r-ub2RSXWftJqXJU5T7oNDwC74qLko9VsC5BgC2oMKw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 18 March 2014 18:01, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 04:17:53PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> > While I am not a fan of backpatching, the fact we are ignoring errors in
>> > some critical cases seems the non-cosmetic parts should be backpatched.
>>
>> pg_resetxlog was not an offender here; its coding was sound.
>>
>> We shouldn't be discussing backpatching a patch that contains changes
>> to coding style.
>
> I was going to remove the coding style changes to pg_resetxlog from the
> backpatched portion.
Why make style changes at all? A patch with no style changes would
mean backpatch and HEAD versions would be the same.
>> ISTM we should change the code with missing checks to adopt the coding
>> style of pg_resetxlog, not the other way around.
>>
>> I assume you or Kevin have this in hand and you don't want me to apply
>> the patch? (Since it was originally my bug)
>
> I know the email subject says pg_archivecleanup but the problem is all
> over our code.
Yes, understood.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-03-18 18:13:22 | Re: Risk Estimation WAS: Planner hints in Postgresql |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-03-18 18:01:19 | Re: pg_archivecleanup bug |