Re: Reviewing freeze map code

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>,Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>,Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>,Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>,Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>,"pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reviewing freeze map code
Date: 2016-07-16 17:45:26
Message-ID: 2E9AE050-767F-40E8-8F09-66BA64E67DE3@anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On July 16, 2016 8:49:06 AM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
>wrote:
>>> I think we have two choices how to deal with that: First, we can add
>a
>>> new flags variable to xl_heap_lock similar to
>>> xl_heap_insert/update/... and bump page magic,
>
>> +1 for going in this way. This will keep us consistent with how
>clear
>> the visibility info in other places like heap_xlog_update().
>
>Yeah. We've already forced a catversion bump for beta3, and I'm about
>to go fix PG_CONTROL_VERSION as well, so there's basically no downside
>to doing an xlog version bump as well. At least, not if you can get it
>in before Monday.

OK, Cool. Will do it later today.

Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-07-16 18:27:48 Re: GiST index build versus NaN coordinates
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-07-16 15:49:06 Re: Reviewing freeze map code