Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoagM6eft2C1ug8skSQ-MiFFm_Y9LvuJ7nuUt8F0TqaBNw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Early locking option to parallel backup  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:29 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> There seems to to be consensus in this thread that the approach Lucas
> proposed isn't what we want, and that instead some shared lock based
> approach is desirable.  As that has been the case for ~1.5 months, I
> propose we mark this as returned with feedback?

Yes, that seems pretty clear-cut to me.  It would be totally unfair if
a patch that hasn't been updated since November were allowed to submit
a new version after the start of the final CommitFest.  We shouldn't
be working on anything now that hasn't been under active development
recently; we have enough things (and then some) that have.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Online enabling of checksums
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: psql tab completion for ALTER INDEX SET