Re: First-draft release notes for back branches are up

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: First-draft release notes for back branches are up
Date: 2019-05-04 19:55:05
Message-ID: 14333.1556999705@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 1:29 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Yeah, I didn't really think it was worth distinguishing. If there
>> is some more general term that covers both calls, maybe we should
>> use that?

> I would just do s/fsync/fsync and sync_file_range/. And I guess also
> wrap them in <function>?

OK, will do it like that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2019-05-04 20:24:42 Re: [HACKERS] Commits 8de72b and 5457a1 (COPY FREEZE)
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2019-05-04 17:45:18 Re: Usage of epoch in txid_current