Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)
Date
Msg-id CAEepm=3jdHjbOER3aeVxfffagNrYMP6=nNSgxPBnrzmkhDCARA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux)  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 6:42 PM Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 at 07:27, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> 2.  I am +1 on back-patching Craig's PANIC-on-failure logic.  Doing
>> nothing is not an option I like.  I have some feedback and changes to
>> propose though; see attached.
>
> Thanks very much for the work on reviewing and revising this.

My plan is do a round of testing and review of this stuff next week
once the dust is settled on the current minor releases (including
fixing a few typos I just spotted and some word-smithing).  All going
well, I will then push the resulting patches to master and all
supported stable branches, unless other reviews or objections appear.
At some point not too far down the track I hope to be ready to
consider committing that other patch that will completely change all
of this code in the master branch, but in any case Craig's patch will
get almost a full minor release cycle to sit in the stable branches
before release.

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: ATTACH/DETACH PARTITION CONCURRENTLY
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Should new partitions inherit their tablespace from their parent?