| From: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Alexander Lakhin' <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Subject: | RE: Random pg_upgrade test failure on drongo |
| Date: | 2024-01-11 02:45:41 |
| Message-ID: | TY3PR01MB98890077A1B01EBB68E2F203F5682@TY3PR01MB9889.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Alexander, Amit,
> > But tomorrow it could be for other tables and if we change this
> > TRUNCATE logic for pg_largeobject (of which chances are less) then
> > there is always a chance that one misses changing this comment. I feel
> > keeping it generic in this case would be better as the problem is
> > generic but it is currently shown for pg_largeobject.
>
> Yes, for sure. So let's keep it generic as you prefer.
>
> Thank you!
Thanks for working the patch. I'm also OK to push the Amit's fix patch.
Best Regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrei Lepikhov | 2024-01-11 02:50:19 | Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira | 2024-01-11 02:29:14 | Re: speed up a logical replica setup |