From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jerry Sievers <gsievers19(at)comcast(dot)net>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SegFault on 9.6.14 |
Date: | 2019-08-12 23:58:03 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob5Rp9hqSeiFHOaJSjgGr3XogNU6gnCrutGxt_ts1N4jg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:48 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> To clarify my position --- I think it's definitely possible to improve
> the situation a great deal. We "just" have to pass down more information
> about whether rescans are possible. What I don't believe is that that
> leads to a bug fix that would be sane to back-patch as far as 9.6.
Sounds like a fair opinion. I'm not sure how complicated the fix
would be so I don't know whether I agree with your opinion, but you
usually have a fairly good intuition for such things, so...
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2019-08-13 00:14:32 | Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-08-12 23:15:42 | Re: pg_stat_replication lag fields return non-NULL values even with NULL LSNs |