From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-core(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WAL & RC1 status |
Date: | 2001-03-02 15:51:11 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.33.0103021148540.88613-100000@mobile.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> I am *not* feeling good about pushing out an RC1 release candidate
> today.
>
> I've been going through the WAL code, trying to understand it and
> document it. I've found a number of minor problems and several major
> ones ("major" meaning "can't really fix without an incompatible file
> format change, hence initdb"). I've reported the major problems to
> the mailing lists but gotten almost no feedback about what to do.
>
> In addition, I'm still looking for the bug that I originally went in to
> find: Scott Parish's report of being unable to restart after a normal
> shutdown of beta4. Examination of his WAL log shows some pretty serious
> lossage (see attached dump). My current theory is that the
> buffer-slinging logic in xlog.c dropped one or more whole buffers' worth
> of log records, but I haven't figured out exactly how.
>
> I want to veto putting out an RC1 until these issues are resolved...
> comments?
Will second it ... Vadim is supposed to be back on the 6th, and Peter has
a couple of changes to configure he wants to do this weekend for the JDBC
stuff ... Thomas and I are in SF the end of next week for some meetings,
so if you can pop off a summary of what you've found to either of us, and
assuming that Vadim doesn't get caught up by then, we can bring them up
"in person" at that time ... ?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-03-02 15:54:04 | Re: WAL & RC1 status |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-03-02 15:48:38 | Re: WAL & RC1 status |