| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Amul Sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_amcheck contrib application |
| Date: | 2021-03-23 23:13:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzmRyajOPrtWk_BoN47fozdqy-o9FK=Sz+3gzF_Mr=cT=Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 12:53 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> One of the advantages of this design is that we verify practically all
> of the work involved in deleting an entire subtree up-front, inside
> _bt_lock_subtree_parent(). It's clearly safe to back out of it if it
> looks dicey.
That's taken care of. I just pushed a commit that teaches
_bt_lock_subtree_parent() to press on.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2021-03-24 00:05:35 | Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-03-23 23:09:43 | Re: multi-install PostgresNode |