Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Stark
Subject Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Date
Msg-id CAM-w4HP+PSgiToDsq6RkGjAftZO7EbjvfkPMqHtsaY9CbVS5CQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 18:40, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> writes:
> > Hm. I seem to have picked a bad checkout. I took the last one before
> > the revert (45aa88fe1d4028ea50ba7d26d390223b6ef78acc).
>
> FWIW, I think that's the first one *after* the revert.

Doh

But the bigger question is. Are we really concerned about this flaky
problem? Is it worth investing time and money on? I can get money to
go buy a G4 or G5 and spend some time on it. It just seems a bit...
niche. But if it's a real bug that represents something broken on
other architectures that just happens to be easier to trigger here it
might be worthwhile.

-- 
greg



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Brar Piening
Date:
Subject: Re: Add id's to various elements in protocol.sgml
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)