Re: Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
Date
Msg-id CAHGQGwF6sVWOQvQ2D50z7K-N2RUA68UZTBfa9Yp+24b5vEh-HA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 10:06 PM David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> On 3/6/18 9:25 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 02:24:24PM +0300, Ivan Kartyshov wrote:
> >> Hello, I now is preparing the patch over syntax that Simon offered. And in
> >> few day I will update the patch.
> >> Thank you for your interest in thread.
> >
> > It has been more than one month since a patch update has been requested,
> > and time is growing short.  This refactored patch introduces a whole new
> > concept as well, so my recommendation would be to mark this patch as
> > returned with feedback, and then review it freshly for v12 if this
> > concept is still alive and around.
>
> This patch wasn't updated at the beginning of the CF and still hasn't
> been updated after almost two weeks.
>
> I have marked the patch Returned with Feedback.  Please resubmit to a
> new CF when you have an updated patch.

There are no updates from about two years before, but this patch
has been registered in CF 2020-03. Not sure why. It should be marked
as Returned with Feedback again?

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: logical replication empty transactions
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Identifying user-created objects