Re: what to revert - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: what to revert
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYT39N65fxqoTuEnYdEdst-KDTC9RBm2nshQ2VMiMmshA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: what to revert  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> > but that might be fixed now.
>>
>> Certainly all evidence suggests that, FUD to the contrary.
>
> So it's now FUD to report issues with a patch that obviously hasn't
> received sufficient benchmarking? Give me break.

Yeah, I don't think that's FUD.  Kevin, since your last fix, we don't
have a round of benchmarking on a big machine to show whether that
fixed the issue or not.  I think that to really know whether this is
fixed, somebody would need to compare current master with current
master after reverting snapshot too old on a big machine and see if
there's a difference.  If anyone has done that, they have not posted
the results.  So it's more accurate to say that we just don't know.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: what to revert
Next
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: what to revert