Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
Date: 2021-11-04 10:36:45
Message-ID: 5A25412F-BEBA-445A-9005-4D46B4E8C85E@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 26 Aug 2021, at 16:56, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> The previous patch was failing because of the recent test changes made
> by commit 201a76183e2 which unified new and get_new_node, attached
> patch has the changes to handle the changes accordingly.

This patch now fails because of the test changes made by commit b3b4d8e68a,
please submit a rebase.

--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2021-11-04 10:46:21 Re: [PATCH] rename column if exists
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2021-11-04 10:23:54 Re: partial heap only tuples