| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Something flaky in the "relfilenode mapping" infrastructure |
| Date: | 2014-03-28 20:43:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20140328204336.GE26319@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-03-28 16:41:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2014-03-27 08:02:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Buildfarm member prairiedog thinks there's something unreliable about
> >> commit f01d1ae3a104019d6d68aeff85c4816a275130b3:
>
> > That's rather odd. It has survived for a couple of months on the other
> > buildfarm animals now... Could one of you apply the attached patch
> > adding more details to eventual failures?
>
> Any objection to separating out the have_mappings bit? It wasn't terribly
> appropriate before, but it seems really out of place in this formulation.
The patch I sent removed the have_mapping thing entirely? Do you mean it
should be there, but as a separate query?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-03-28 20:45:28 | Re: Something flaky in the "relfilenode mapping" infrastructure |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-03-28 20:41:15 | Re: Something flaky in the "relfilenode mapping" infrastructure |