Re: snapshot too old, configured by time

From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: snapshot too old, configured by time
Date: 2016-04-19 14:31:42
Message-ID: CACjxUsNNWx=cT8v-RfUaUDvYxYaEHpeFKP6NdZZBA-rd+oPqiw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> The right thing to do about that is just change it back to the
> way Kevin had it originally.

Since this change to BufferGetPage() has caused severe back-patch
pain for at least two committers so far, I will revert that (very
recent) change to this patch later today unless I hear an
objections.

--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2016-04-19 14:52:37 Re: Declarative partitioning
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2016-04-19 14:26:47 Re: Declarative partitioning