Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] vacuum process size

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mike Mascari <mascarim(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] vacuum process size
Date: 1999-08-25 00:22:16
Message-ID: 199908250022.UAA03795@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> >I have just committed changes into current (but not REL6_5) to make
> 
> Just for a confirmation: I see REL6_5_PATCHES and REL6_5 Tag in the
> CVS respository. I thought that REL6_5_PATCHES is the Tag for the 6.5
> statble tree and would eventually become 6.5.2. If so, what is the
> REL6_5 Tag? Or I totally miss the point?

REL6_5 was a mistake.
-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 1999-08-25 01:11:42
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] vacuum process size
Previous:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 1999-08-25 00:17:03
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] Sorting costs (was Caution: tonight's commits force initdb)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group