Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bert
Subject Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work
Date
Msg-id CAFCtE1nZG7voFL6k1KibyGz4kEya1uuRizGbE5Ok4S+Z6EVjHg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
+1

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> > Ripping it out and replacing it monolithically will not
>> > change that; it will only make the detailed history harder to
>> > reconstruct, and I *will* want to reconstruct it.
>>
>> What's something that might happen six months from now and lead you to inspect
>> master or 9.5 multixact.c between 4f627f8 and its revert?
>
> "Hey, what has happened to multixact.c lately? I'm investigating a bug,
> and I wonder if it already has been fixed?", "Uh, what was the problem
> with that earlier large commit?", "Hey, what has changed between beta2
> and the final release?"...

Quite.

I can't believe we're still having this silly discussion. Can we please move on?

--
Peter Geoghegan


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



--
Bert Desmet
0477/305361

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work
Next
From: Andreas Seltenreich
Date:
Subject: Re: [sqlsmith] Failed to generate plan on lateral subqueries