Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes
Date: 2017-03-15 02:30:19
Message-ID: CAA4eK1K0UJswCRf81WwJFO4H=+ZvbmKTNhAps-NkdmHRsq1GnQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:59 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:48 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> We didn't found any issue with the above testing.
>
> Great! I've committed the latest version of the patch, with some
> cosmetic changes.
>

Thanks a lot. I have noticed that the test case patch for "snapshot
too old" is not committed. Do you want to leave that due to timing
requirement or do you want me to submit it separately so that we can
deal with it separately and may take an input from Kevin?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-03-15 02:34:22 Re: New procedural language
Previous Message Noah Misch 2017-03-15 02:25:38 Re: [PATCH] Suppress Clang 3.9 warnings