Re: wal_compression=zstd

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: wal_compression=zstd
Date: 2022-03-07 06:36:31
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:10:35AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I don't see why patch 5 shouldn't be applied forthwith.

Only applying 0005 would result in a failure in the TAP test for a
problem whose fix is attempted in 0006. This is an issue unrelated to
this thread.

FWIW, I am a bit disturbed by EnsureTopTransactionIdLogged() and its
design in 0006, where we'd finish by using a XLogFlush() call within
two SQL functions, but I have not really looked at the problem to see
if it is a viable solution or not.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message vignesh C 2022-03-07 07:17:43 Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup
Previous Message Peter Smith 2022-03-07 06:20:03 Re: Handle infinite recursion in logical replication setup