Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On 21.03.2012 01:05, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Improve the -l (limit) option recently added to contrib/vacuumlo.
> Shouldn't this be backported? Without it, vacuumlo is effectively broken
> in 9.0 and 9.1.
I was wondering about that. You could argue for either "it's a new
feature" or "it's a bug fix". It's a simple enough change that I see
little risk in it, so the argument against backporting seems weak.
If there are not objections, I'll just copy the current vacuumlo code
in toto into 9.0 and 9.1.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-03-21 13:59:49|
|Subject: Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock) |
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-03-21 13:26:58|
|Subject: Re: Memory usage during sorting|
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-03-21 14:58:07|
|Subject: pgsql: Improve connectMaintenanceDatabase() error reporting.|
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2012-03-21 07:10:28|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve the -l (limit) option recently added