From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Burd, Greg" <greg(at)burd(dot)me>, Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Support for 8-byte TOAST values (aka the TOAST infinite loop problem) |
Date: | 2025-09-16 05:14:43 |
Message-ID: | aMjyQ-0lC1OvVzGO@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 02:49:06PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I have dropped the amcheck test patch for now, which was fun but it's
> not really necessary for the "basics". I have done also more tests,
> playing for example with pg_resetwal, installcheck and pg_upgrade
> scenarios. I am wondering if it would be worth doing a pg_resetwal in
> the node doing an installcheck on the instance to be upgraded, bumping
> its next OID to be much larger than 4 billion, actually..
Four patches had conflicts with 748caa9dcb68, so rebased as v6.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-09-16 04:56:23 | Re: Improving the names generated for indexes on expressions |