| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Unhappy about API changes in the no-fsm-for-small-rels patch |
| Date: | 2019-04-18 21:14:49 |
| Message-ID: | 26542.1555622089@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> My compromise suggestion would be to try to give John and Amit ~2 weeks
> to come up with a cleanup proposal, and then decide whether to 1) revert
> 2) apply the new patch, 3) decide to live with the warts for 12, and
> apply the patch in 13. As we would already have a patch, 3) seems like
> it'd be more tenable than without.
Seems reasonable. I think we should shoot to have this resolved before
the end of the month, but it doesn't have to be done immediately.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2019-04-18 21:17:02 | Re: block-level incremental backup |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-04-18 21:10:29 | Re: Unhappy about API changes in the no-fsm-for-small-rels patch |