From: | James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [DOC] Document auto vacuum interruption |
Date: | 2020-02-14 21:14:01 |
Message-ID: | CAAaqYe81UoD0EtmaVDmqD-Ra=a7j9bqsiBMDcVHJzqbB8kO-tA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 5:34 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:25 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:48 PM James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 2:21 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Let me know what you think of attached? I think we can back-patch
> > > > this patch. What do you think? Does anyone else have an opinion on
> > > > this patch especially if we see any problem in back-patching this?
> > >
> > > The attached looks great!
> > >
> > > I was working on HEAD for the patch, but this concern has been an
> > > issue for quite a long time. We were running into it on 9.6 in
> > > production, for example. And given how frequently it seems like there
> > > are large-scale production issues related to auto vacuum, I think any
> > > amount of back patching we can do to make that footgun less likely
> > > would be a good thing.
> > >
> >
> > Okay, I will commit this tomorrow unless someone has any comments or objections.
> >
>
> Pushed with minor changes. There was one extra space in a few lines
> and the tag for back-branches (from 10~9.4) was slightly different.
I completely forgot to reply to this; thanks Amit for working on this.
James
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2020-02-14 21:19:57 | Re: Standards compliance of SET ROLE / SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION |
Previous Message | James Coleman | 2020-02-14 21:10:35 | Re: [DOC] Document concurrent index builds waiting on each other |