From: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ilya Anfimov <ilan(at)tzirechnoy(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15 |
Date: | 2022-03-03 11:07:25 |
Message-ID: | CAJ7c6TNA8rd=Pqfc4yDpug60VHwrBA59qS8ETW_qwDZigDfPqw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi hackers,
> The patch doesn't apply - I suppose the patch is relative a forked postgres
No, the authors just used a little outdated `master` branch. I
successfully applied it against 31d8d474 and then rebased to the
latest master (62ce0c75). The new version is attached.
Not 100% sure if my rebase is correct since I didn't invest too much
time into reviewing the code. But at least it passes `make
installcheck` locally. Let's see what cfbot will tell us.
> I encourage trying to break down the patch into smaller incrementally useful
> pieces. E.g. making all the SLRUs 64bit would be a substantial and
> independently committable piece.
Completely agree. And the changes like:
+#if 0 /* XXX remove unit tests */
... suggest that the patch is pretty raw in its current state.
Pavel, Maxim, don't you mind me splitting the patchset, or would you
like to do it yourself and/or maybe include more changes? I don't know
how actively you are working on this.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v10-0001-64-bit-GUCs.patch | application/octet-stream | 25.6 KB |
v10-0002-README.XID64.patch | application/octet-stream | 7.0 KB |
v10-0003-Add-64bit-xid.patch | application/octet-stream | 744.4 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Borisov | 2022-03-03 11:22:39 | Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15 |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-03-03 10:47:08 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |