On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 1:51 AM, gabrielle <gorthx@gmail.com> wrote:
> patch attached.
What version did you generate that off? It didn't apply cleanly..
Also, I think the change low->row is actually wrong. It applies to all
low level modifications *including* row level modifications. But there
can be other types of records.
I manually rebased it since it was so small, and applied, though. Thanks!
I did note, which I haven't noted before, that that page talks about
the default wal_buffers being 8. That's clearly just wrong, and
somethign that wasn't properly updated when we added autotuning of
wal_buffers, isn't it?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
