Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Date: 2018-07-18 13:06:22
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 06:42:10AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:28 AM, Andrew Dunstan
> <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Well, we'd be getting rid of it because of a danger of data loss which we
>> can't otherwise mitigate. Maybe it does need to be backpatched, even if we
>> haven't had complaints.
> What's wrong with the approach proposed in
> ?

For back-branches that's very invasive so that seems risky to me
particularly seeing the low number of complaints on the matter.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dean Rasheed 2018-07-18 13:07:44 Re: PG 10: could not generate random cancel key
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2018-07-18 13:01:34 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pgbench "progress" test pending solution of its timing is (fwd)