Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths
Date
Msg-id Yz02UaqQEfl7MrZj@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths  (Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Non-replayable WAL records through overflows and >MaxAllocSize lengths  (Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Matthias,

On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 02:07:05PM +0200, Matthias van de Meent wrote:

My apologies for the time it took me to come back to this thread.
> > + * To accommodate some overhead, hhis MaxXLogRecordSize value allows for
> > s/hhis/this/.
>
> Will be included in the next update..

v8 fails to apply.  Could you send a rebased version?

As far as I recall the problems with the block image sizes are solved,
but we still have a bit more to do in terms of the overall record
size.  Perhaps there are some parts of the patch you'd like to
revisit?

For now, I have switched the back as waiting on author, and moved it
to the next CF.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch proposal: make use of regular expressions for the username in pg_hba.conf
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Move backup-related code to xlogbackup.c/.h