Re: prevent immature WAL streaming

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com" <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "mengjuan(dot)cmj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com" <mengjuan(dot)cmj(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, "Jakub(dot)Wartak(at)tomtom(dot)com" <Jakub(dot)Wartak(at)tomtom(dot)com>, Ryo Matsumura <matsumura(dot)ryo(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Subject: Re: prevent immature WAL streaming
Date: 2021-11-25 20:15:49
Message-ID: 318311.1637871349@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> However, this seems too forgiving:

... also, I don't know if you intended this already, but the
VerifyOverwriteContrecord change should only be applied in
back branches. There's no need for it in HEAD.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2021-11-25 22:32:07 Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-11-25 20:12:14 Re: prevent immature WAL streaming