From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Asim R P <apraveen(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |
Date: | 2018-11-08 02:41:01 |
Message-ID: | CAEepm=3jdHjbOER3aeVxfffagNrYMP6=nNSgxPBnrzmkhDCARA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 6:42 PM Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 at 07:27, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> 2. I am +1 on back-patching Craig's PANIC-on-failure logic. Doing
>> nothing is not an option I like. I have some feedback and changes to
>> propose though; see attached.
>
> Thanks very much for the work on reviewing and revising this.
My plan is do a round of testing and review of this stuff next week
once the dust is settled on the current minor releases (including
fixing a few typos I just spotted and some word-smithing). All going
well, I will then push the resulting patches to master and all
supported stable branches, unless other reviews or objections appear.
At some point not too far down the track I hope to be ready to
consider committing that other patch that will completely change all
of this code in the master branch, but in any case Craig's patch will
get almost a full minor release cycle to sit in the stable branches
before release.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-11-08 02:42:22 | Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent? |
Previous Message | David Rowley | 2018-11-08 02:10:00 | Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY |