On 7 June 2012 22:54, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I thought it would be a lot safer and probably a little bit quicker
> if we just split DropRelFileNodeBuffers into two routines, one for
> the specific-fork case and one for the all-forks case; and then the
> same for its main caller smgrdounlink. So I modified the patch along
> those lines and committed it.
> As committed, the smgrdounlinkfork case is actually dead code; it's
> never called from anywhere. I left it in place just in case we want
> it someday.
That's fine. The first version of the patch did it exactly that way.
I tried to double guess objections and so recoded it the way submitted.
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-06-08 00:06:44|
|Subject: Re: log_newpage header comment|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2012-06-07 23:42:22|
|Subject: Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off|