Re: Parallel copy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From vignesh C
Subject Re: Parallel copy
Date
Msg-id CALDaNm1-pzvi7JPOPeP3gNO+8tHJi10-Yh48tK1Gpxe1c-zwPw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel copy  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Parallel copy  (Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 9:51 PM Tomas Vondra
<tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 12:33:48PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> >On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 9:55 AM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The patches were not applying because of the recent commits.
> >> I have rebased the patch over head & attached.
> >>
> >I rebased v2-0006-Parallel-Copy-For-Binary-Format-Files.patch.
> >
> >Putting together all the patches rebased on to the latest commit
> >b8fdee7d0ca8bd2165d46fb1468f75571b706a01. Patches from 0001 to 0005
> >are rebased by Vignesh, that are from the previous mail and the patch
> >0006 is rebased by me.
> >
> >Please consider this patch set for further review.
> >
>
> I'd suggest incrementing the version every time an updated version is
> submitted, even if it's just a rebased version. It makes it clearer
> which version of the code is being discussed, etc.

Sure, we will take care of this when we are sending the next set of patches.

Regards,
Vignesh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: Which SET TYPE don't actually require a rewrite
Next
From: "Andrey M. Borodin"
Date:
Subject: Re: Amcheck: do rightlink verification with lock coupling