From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Document XLOG_INCLUDE_XID a little better |
Date: | 2021-10-26 03:49:03 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1Ljo7SsuwiEFwF6v_8qWfWzm7e7mE5biN5DgS8NgL=Tyg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 4:21 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 11:20 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 9:11 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > v5-0001, incorporates all the comment fixes suggested by Alvaro. and
> > 0001 is an additional patch which moves
> > MarkCurrentTransactionIdLoggedIfAny(), out of the critical section.
> >
>
> Thanks, both your patches look good to me except that we need to
> remove the sentence related to the revert of ade24dab97 from the
> commit message. I think we should backpatch the first patch to 14
> where it was introduced and commit the second patch (related to moving
> code out of critical section) only to HEAD but we can even backpatch
> the second one till 9.6 for the sake of consistency. What do you guys
> think?
>
The other option could be to just commit both these patches in HEAD as
there is no correctness issue here.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-10-26 04:57:43 | pgsql: doc: Fix grammar in page of pg_receivewal |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2021-10-26 03:06:30 | pgsql: Revert "Remove unused wait events." |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Smith | 2021-10-26 04:24:43 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
Previous Message | Sasasu | 2021-10-26 03:08:38 | Re: XTS cipher mode for cluster file encryption |