| From: | "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Question on win32 semaphore simulation |
| Date: | 2006-05-11 01:57:27 |
| Message-ID: | e3u5sn$tn2$1@news.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote
> >
> > Sorry for the late reply. Maybe more intensive tests are needed? Since
> > this bug seems could not lead data corruption, we can wait till next bug
> > report and let the user test it then decide to apply?
>
> Well we did have a bug report by Peter Brant, and a test by him with the
> patch that fixes it, so it seems it should be applied. The URLs I
> posted had that information.
>
Ok, go ahead. What I am worrying about is to cause bigger trouble than now
... I will watch it if anything unexpected reported.
Regards,
Qingqing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-11 02:25:14 | Re: [GENERAL] Concurrency problem building indexes |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-05-11 01:50:10 | Re: [HACKERS] Question on win32 semaphore simulation |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-11 01:57:44 | Re: [HACKERS] Question on win32 semaphore simulation |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-05-11 01:52:29 | Re: [HACKERS] Question on win32 semaphore simulation |