Re: [PATCH] lock_timeout and common SIGALRM framework

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lock_timeout and common SIGALRM framework
Date: 2012-12-08 14:30:31
Message-ID: 20121208143031.GB13557@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2012-10-18 22:40:15 +0200, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> 2012-10-18 20:08 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
> >Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> >>Boszormenyi Zoltan escribió:
> >>>this is the latest one, fixing a bug in the accounting
> >>>of per-statement lock timeout handling and tweaking
> >>>some comments.
> >>Tom, are you able to give this patch some more time on this commitfest?
> >I'm still hoping to get to it, but I've been spending a lot of time on
> >bug fixing rather than patch review lately :-(. If you're hoping to
> >close out the current CF soon, maybe we should just slip it to the next
> >one.
>
> Fine by me. Thanks.

According to this the current state of the patch should be "Ready for
Committer" not "Needs Review" is that right? I changed the state for
now...

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-12-08 14:40:43 Re: Support for REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Andres Freund 2012-12-08 14:26:08 Re: PATCH: optimized DROP of multiple tables within a transaction