Re: WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations
Date: 2016-03-10 19:50:12
Message-ID: CANP8+j+mXO8STeJn+YgtQnXgjRRevTq25KP7Zq7-6MurCF=dcg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3 February 2016 at 23:12, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
wrote:

> It quacks suspiciously like a bug.
>

Agreed

What's more important is that is very publicly a bug in the eyes of others
and should be fixed and backpatched soon.

We have a maintenance release coming in a couple of weeks and I'd like to
see this in there.

Let's set good standards for responsiveness and correctness.

I'd also like to see some theory in comments and an explanation of why
we're doing this (code).

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-03-10 19:51:59 Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification
Previous Message Igal @ Lucee.org 2016-03-10 19:48:19 Re: Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)