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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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