Re: WAL & RC1 status

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-core(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WAL & RC1 status
Date: 2001-03-02 15:51:11
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.4.33.0103021148540.88613-100000@mobile.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> I am *not* feeling good about pushing out an RC1 release candidate
> today.
>
> I've been going through the WAL code, trying to understand it and
> document it. I've found a number of minor problems and several major
> ones ("major" meaning "can't really fix without an incompatible file
> format change, hence initdb"). I've reported the major problems to
> the mailing lists but gotten almost no feedback about what to do.
>
> In addition, I'm still looking for the bug that I originally went in to
> find: Scott Parish's report of being unable to restart after a normal
> shutdown of beta4. Examination of his WAL log shows some pretty serious
> lossage (see attached dump). My current theory is that the
> buffer-slinging logic in xlog.c dropped one or more whole buffers' worth
> of log records, but I haven't figured out exactly how.
>
> I want to veto putting out an RC1 until these issues are resolved...
> comments?

Will second it ... Vadim is supposed to be back on the 6th, and Peter has
a couple of changes to configure he wants to do this weekend for the JDBC
stuff ... Thomas and I are in SF the end of next week for some meetings,
so if you can pop off a summary of what you've found to either of us, and
assuming that Vadim doesn't get caught up by then, we can bring them up
"in person" at that time ... ?

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-03-02 15:54:04 Re: WAL & RC1 status
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-03-02 15:48:38 Re: WAL & RC1 status