Re: standby recovery fails (tablespace related) (tentative patch and discussion)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Paul Guo <guopa(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Asim Praveen <pasim(at)vmware(dot)com>, "thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com" <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp" <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: standby recovery fails (tablespace related) (tentative patch and discussion)
Date: 2021-08-10 20:56:37
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY3oqC3Bh_Q-Qs280WU9v5kNWNtTTBQJ2vG1e68nQ78bg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 6:20 AM Paul Guo <guopa(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
> Rebased.

The commit message for 0001 is not clear enough for me to understand
what problem it's supposed to be fixing. The code comments aren't
really either. They make it sound like there's some problem with
copying symlinks but mostly they just talk about callbacks, which
doesn't really help me understand what problem we'd have if we just
didn't commit this (or reverted it later).

I am not really convinced by Álvaro's claim that 0004 is a "fix"; I
think I'd call it an improvement. But either way I agree that could
just be committed.

I haven't analyzed 0002 and 0003 yet.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Flower 2021-08-10 20:57:33 Re: add operator ^= to mean not equal (like != and <>)
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-08-10 20:46:18 Re: ECPG bug fix: DECALRE STATEMENT and DEALLOCATE, DESCRIBE