Re: Error on failed COMMIT

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)postgres(dot)rocks>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tony Locke <tlocke(at)tlocke(dot)org(dot)uk>, Shay Rojansky <roji(at)roji(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Haumacher, Bernhard" <haui(at)haumacher(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Error on failed COMMIT
Date: 2021-03-25 19:23:53
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/25/21 3:07 PM, Dave Cramer wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 at 12:04, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
> <mailto:david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>> wrote:
> Test are failing on the cfbot for this patch and it looks like a new
> patch is needed from Dave, at the least, so marking Waiting on Author.
> Should we be considering this patch Returned with Feedback instead?
> Not sure, at this point the impetus for this is not getting a lot of
> traction.
> Honestly I think the approach I took is too simple and I don't have the
> inclination at the moment to
> rewrite it.

In that case Returned with Feedback is appropriate so I have done that.

Of course, the conversation can continue on this thread or a new one and
when you have a new patch you can create a new CF entry.


In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2021-03-25 19:47:26 Re: Replication slot stats misgivings
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2021-03-25 19:07:17 Re: Error on failed COMMIT