| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unlogged sequences |
| Date: | 2022-04-07 15:24:38 |
| Message-ID: | 3da1154b-54b2-719c-c04b-f0cb50735a10@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06.04.22 11:12, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> We could also move forward with this patch independently of the other
> one. If we end up reverting the other one, then this one won't be very
> useful but it won't really hurt anything and it would presumably become
> useful eventually. What we presumably don't want is that the sequence
> replication patch gets repaired for PG15 and we didn't end up committing
> this patch because of uncertainty.
I have received some encouragement off-list to go ahead with this, so
it's been committed.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-04-07 15:24:49 | Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-04-07 15:19:15 | Re: API stability [was: pgsql: Fix possible recovery trouble if TRUNCATE overlaps a checkpoint.] |