Re: [HACKERS] Subscription code improvements

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Subscription code improvements
Date: 2017-11-30 03:28:48
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSQmgcQq7Ve+NG2K7QxV=NWmOzP2t0HVnZVudg9gGLMhw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 8:17 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Peter Eisentraut
>> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On 8/8/17 05:58, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>>> Are you planning to work on remaining patches 0005 and 0006 that
>>>> improve the subscription codes in PG11 cycle? If not, I will take over
>>>> them and work on the next CF.
>>>
>>> Based on your assessment, the remaining patches were not required bug
>>> fixes. So I think preparing them for the next commit fest would be great.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for the comment.
>>
>> After more thought, since 0001 and 0003 patches on the first mail also
>> improve the subscription codes and are worth to be considered, I
>> picked total 4 patches up and updated them. I'm planning to work on
>> these patches in the next CF.
>>
>
> Added this item to the next commit fest.

The patch set fails to apply. Please provide a rebased version. I am
moving this entry to next CF with waiting on author as status.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2017-11-30 03:30:56 Re: [HACKERS] create_unique_path and GEQO
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-11-30 03:26:30 Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transaction id (XID)?