Re: pg_dump with both --serializable-deferrable and -j

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump with both --serializable-deferrable and -j
Date: 2015-01-29 16:10:09
Message-ID: 6620.1422547809@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> writes:
> I propose to apply the attached to master and back-patch to 9.3,
> and follow that with a patch (for master only) along the lines
> suggested by Andres. Since *that* change is more invasive and
> changes existing behavior I will submit it to the open CF for
> review. Objections?

Only the nit-picky one that I quite dislike putting a comment block inside
an if-condition like that. It's not really house style around here,
and in particular I suspect pgindent might not treat it nicely.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-01-29 16:29:17 Re: Memory leak in gingetbitmap
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2015-01-29 16:09:31 Memory leak in gingetbitmap