| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Subject: | Re: global / super barriers (for checksums) |
| Date: | 2019-11-17 13:38:21 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEydoo92AVTFr8vJhuSwY+fMoXvN7x6TuUnQtJerwiPdSw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 8:45 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-11-13 12:26:34 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > TL;DR: I'm not sure that we need 0001; I propose to commit 0002; and I
> > have some concerns about 0003 and am interested in working further on
> > it.
>
> Thanks for looking at the patch!
>
+1 (well, +<more than one>, but there is a quota)
> - The patch needs some general tidying up, like comments and naming
> > consistency and stuff like that.
>
> Yea. It really was a prototype to allow Magnus to continue...
>
And a very useful one! :) So thanks for that one as well.
> Andres, Magnus, if neither of you are planning to work on this soon, I
> > might like to jump in and run with this. Please let me know your
> > thoughts.
>
> I'm not planning to do so in the near term - so I'd more than welcome
> you to do so.
>
I'm definitely happy to work with it, but I did not and do not feel I have
the skills for doing the "proper review" needed for it. So I am also very
happy for you to pick it up and run with it.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2019-11-17 18:18:43 | Re: Connections hang indefinitely while taking a gin index's LWLock buffer_content lock(PG10.7) |
| Previous Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2019-11-17 11:56:52 | Re: SimpleLruTruncate() mutual exclusion |