On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Michael Paquier
>> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't have any more inputs on this patch and it looks good to me.
>> So, I'm moving the status to ready for committer.
>
> Thanks!
>
>>> At some point it would really make sense to group all things under the
>>> same banner (64-b LO, pg_basebackup, and now pg_rewind).
>>>
>> +1. Implementation-wise, I prefer pg_recvint64 to fe_recvint64.
>
> So do I. That's a matter of taste I guess.
Heikki, this bug is rather bad for anybody using pg_rewind with
relation file sizes larger than 2GB as this corrupts data of
instances. I think that you would be the best fit as a committer to
look at this patch as you implemented the tool first, and it would be
a bad idea to let that sit for a too long time. Could it be possible
to spare a bit of your time at some point to look at it?
--
Michael
