| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: autovacuum scheduling starvation and frenzy |
| Date: | 2014-06-23 23:19:01 |
| Message-ID: | 17728.1403565541@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I didn't add this patch to the commitfest, because it was just a point
> for discussion and not actually proposed for application. But It
> doesn't seem to have provoked much discussion either.
> Should I go add this to the next commitfest?
> I do see it listed as a resolved item in
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.4_Open_Items
> But I can't find a commit that would resolve it, so does that mean the
> resolution was that the behavior was not new in 9.4 and so didn't need
> to be fixed for it?
It looks to me like Robert added that item to the "open items" page,
but he put it at the bottom --- ie in the "already resolved items"
list:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/index.php?title=PostgreSQL_9.4_Open_Items&diff=22417&oldid=22380
Probably this was a mistake and it should have gone into the still-to-do
list.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-23 23:34:08 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #10728: json_to_recordset with nested json objects NULLs columns |
| Previous Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2014-06-23 23:12:53 | Re: How about a proper TEMPORARY TABLESPACE? |