| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |
| Date: | 2016-04-19 15:05:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20160419150548.ud6u5kdgr7gtaw3a@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-04-19 12:03:22 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > > The right thing to do about that is just change it back to the
> > > way Kevin had it originally.
> >
> > Since this change to BufferGetPage() has caused severe back-patch
> > pain for at least two committers so far, I will revert that (very
> > recent) change to this patch later today unless I hear an
> > objections.
>
> I vote for back-patching a no-op change instead, as discussed elsewhere.
What about Tom's argument that that'd be problematic for external code?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2016-04-19 15:11:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-04-19 15:03:22 | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |