| 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>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: snapshot too old issues, first around wraparound and then more. |
| Date: | 2021-06-15 18:20:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wzmr7oztTJLdo=oEi4sOBJzJEnCJZVbGPxzCEaJ4+Ui3mA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 11:01 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The goal I have in mind is for snapshot_too_old to be fixed or gone
> in v15. I don't feel a need to force the issue sooner than that, so
> there's plenty of time for someone to step up, if anyone wishes to.
Seems more than reasonable to me. A year ought to be plenty of time if
the feature truly is salvageable.
What do other people think? Ideally we could commit to that hard
deadline now. To me the important thing is to actually have a real
deadline that forces the issue one way or another. This situation must
not be allowed to drag on forever.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2021-06-15 18:28:04 | Re: Duplicate history file? |
| Previous Message | John Naylor | 2021-06-15 18:15:56 | Re: a path towards replacing GEQO with something better |