Horton

Re: [PATCH 11/16] Add infrastructure for manipulating multiple streams of wal on a segment handling level

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2012-06-29T13:01:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Don't waste the last segment of each 4GB logical log file.

  2. Stamp HEAD as 9.3devel.

  3. Wake WALSender to reduce data loss at failover for async commit.

  4. Make the visibility map crash-safe.

Hi,

On Friday, June 29, 2012 02:43:52 PM Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> trying to review this one according to
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reviewing_a_Patch
> 
> # Is the patch in context diff format
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff#Context_format>?
> No. (Does this requirement still apply after PostgreSQL switched to GIT?)
Many people seem to send patches in unified format and just some days ago Tom 
said it doesn't matter to him. I still can't properly read context diffs, so I 
am using unified...

> # Does it apply cleanly to the current git master?
> No. The patches 01...09 in this series taken from the mailing list apply
> cleanly, 10 and 11 fail with rejects.
Yea, and even the patches before that need to be rebased, at least partially 
they won't compile even though they apply cleanly.

I will produce a rebased version soon, but then we haven't fully aggreed on 
preliminary patches to this one, so there doesn't seem to be too much point in 
reviewing this one before the other stuff is clear.

Marking the patch as "Returned with Feedback" for now. I have done the same 
with 13, 15. Those seem to be too much in limbo for CF-style reviews.

Thanks!

Andres