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

Re: [HACKERS] vacuum process size

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] vacuum process size
Date: 1999-08-25 14:05:54
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.10.9908251103250.86612-100000@thelab.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Tom Lane wrote:

> Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > 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?
> 
> Right, REL6_5_PATCHES is the 6.5.* branch.  REL6_5 is just a tag ---
> that is, it's effectively a frozen snapshot of the 6.5 release,
> not an evolvable branch.
> 
> I am not sure if Marc intends to continue this naming convention
> in future, or if it was just a mistake to create REL6_5 as a tag
> not a branch.  I don't see a whole lot of use for the frozen tag
> myself...

I like the frozen tag myself, since, in the future, if we need to create a
quick tar ball of what things looked like at that release (ie.
v6.5->v6.5.2 patch?), its easy to generate...

Actually, come to think of it...am going to try that out now...report back
in a bit...

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org 


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ansley, MichaelDate: 1999-08-25 14:17:57
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] vacuum process size
Previous:From: Ansley, MichaelDate: 1999-08-25 13:56:30
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] vacuum process size

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