From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal(at)pivotal(dot)io>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Race conditions with checkpointer and shutdown |
Date: | 2019-06-12 18:52:55 |
Message-ID: | 2809.1560365575@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2019-Apr-29, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal(at)pivotal(dot)io> writes:
>>> Have we decided if this will be applied to back branches?
>> My feeling about it is "maybe eventually, but most definitely not
>> the week before a set of minor releases". Some positive experience
>> with Greenplum would help increase confidence in the patch, for sure.
> I looked at the buildfarm failures for the recoveryCheck stage. It
> looks like there is only one failure for branch master after this
> commit, which was chipmunk saying:
> ...
> AFAICS this is wholly unrelated to the problem at hand.
Yeah, that seems unrelated.
> No other animal failed recoveryCheck test; before the commit, the
> failure was not terribly frequent, but rarely would 10 days go by
> without it failing. So I suggest that the bug has indeed been fixed.
I feel pretty good about it too.
> Maybe now's a good time to get it back-patched?
Should we do that now, or wait till after next week's releases?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2019-06-12 18:53:29 | Re: hyrax vs. RelationBuildPartitionDesc |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-06-12 18:49:29 | Re: GiST limits on contrib/cube with dimension > 100? |