| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Idea for improving buildfarm robustness |
| Date: | 2015-10-03 05:56:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTWVS47+wNYn6O0vafKCdSucMNV-xOVZdmU+FPpUV6E+Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Here's a rewritten patch that looks at postmaster.pid instead of
> > pg_control. It should be effectively the same as the prior patch in
> terms
> > of response to directory-removal cases, and it should also catch many
> > overwrite cases.
>
> BTW, my thought at the moment is to wait till after next week's releases
> to push this in. I think it's probably solid, but it doesn't seem like
> it's worth taking the risk of pushing shortly before a wrap date.
>
That seems a wiser approach to me. Down to which version are you planning a
backpatch? As this is aimed for the buildfarm stability with TAP stuff, 9.4?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2015-10-03 06:11:48 | Re: pgbench stats per script & other stuff |
| Previous Message | dinesh kumar | 2015-10-03 04:43:42 | Re: Proposing COPY .. WITH PERMISSIVE |