Re: Update README.tuplock?

From: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Update README.tuplock?
Date: 2015-05-26 00:18:37
Message-ID: 5563BBDD.3020906@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-05-26 AM 03:12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Jim Nasby wrote:
>>> On 5/25/15 4:38 AM, Amit Langote wrote:
>>>> Commit f741300c90141ee274f19a13629ae03a9806b598 ("Have multixact be truncated
>>>> by checkpoint, not vacuum") changed who truncates multixact. README.tuplock
>>>> still says VACUUM is in charge of the truncation. I think it's an oversight in
>>>> updating the README unless I am missing something.
>>>>
>>>> I attempted to fix it as attached. See if that makes sense.
>>>
>>> Looks good and is AFAIK correct.
>>
>> No, it's wrong .. Will push a fix, thanks.
>
> Pushed and back-patched. I noticed that I hadn't backpatched b01a4f6838
> which also updated this file, so I did so now as a single commit.
>

Thanks!

Amit

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-05-26 01:33:03 Re: fsync-pgdata-on-recovery tries to write to more files than previously
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2015-05-25 23:41:07 Re: Run pgindent now?