| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn() |
| Date: | 2017-05-10 20:09:36 |
| Message-ID: | e6d9ea90-4d69-e964-01e6-d86a6d60c670@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/10/2017 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> In terms of the alternatives I listed previously, it seems like
>>> nobody liked alternatives #3, #4, or #5, leaving us with #1 (do
>>> nothing) or #2 (apply this patch). By my count, Peter is the
>>> only one in favor of doing nothing, and is outvoted. I'll push
>>> the patch later today if I don't hear additional comments.
>
>> For the record, I also voted for doing nothing.
>
> Hm, well, anybody else want to vote?
+1 for #2
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2017-05-10 20:09:38 | Transaction held open by autoanalyze can be a bottleneck |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-05-10 20:04:53 | Re: [PATCH v2] Progress command to monitor progression of long running SQL queries |