| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: wrong fds used for refilenodes after pg_upgrade relfilenode changes Reply-To: |
| Date: | 2022-02-10 20:10:38 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGJBxaBgBfG4tHzXNFyTX9hQ6aU0OCfTmvNs2TU7VZWLXg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 7:50 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> The main question in my mind is who is going to actually make that
> happen. It was your idea (I think), Thomas coded it, and my commit
> made it a live problem. So who's going to get something committed
> here?
I was about to commit that, because the original Windows problem it
solved is showing up occasionally in CI failures (that is, it already
solves a live problem, albeit a different and non-data-corrupting
one):
It seems like I should go ahead and do that today, and we can study
further uses for PROCSIGNAL_BARRIER_SMGRRELEASE in follow-on work?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2022-02-10 20:18:46 | List of all* PostgreSQL EXTENSIONs in the world |
| Previous Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2022-02-10 19:39:56 | Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum |