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

Re: Getting to 8.3 beta1

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Getting to 8.3 beta1
Date: 2007-09-27 16:38:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 12:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Dang, me again eh? :-)
> > Well, I'm available now and tomorrow to do any further work required.
> Looking back at your original discussion of the bug,
> I'm wondering why you chose option #3 rather than option #4?

IIRC you rejected #4 here
I was raising it again 'cos I thought it sensible, and still do.

#4 is easy enough to implement, so I worked on #3 so we had a choice.

> I still find the proposed patch a bit crufty.

Your coding is always neater than mine, so we need not debate my
cruftiness. There are two parts to the patch as submitted; IIRC the
shorter chunk *may* be cosmetic only - though its too far back for me to
recall with precision.

The main issue is that we send *back* to the archive a file that we just
got from it, which is always wrong. Stopping it from doing that in a
direct manner seems much neater to me. #4 solves another problem
(mentioned in the thread you quote on Admin), so I want that, but I
dislike the circuitous manner in which it solves this problem. We'd need
to document carefully to avoid a future bug there.

I would prefer #3 and #4 together...

  Simon Riggs

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-09-27 16:39:11
Subject: Re: Getting to 8.3 beta1
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-09-27 16:32:05
Subject: Re: Getting to 8.3 beta1

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group