Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.

At Tue, 7 Apr 2020 12:15:00 +0900, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in 
> 
> 
> On 2020/04/07 4:04, David Steele wrote:
> > On 4/6/20 1:43 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2020/03/19 22:22, Pavel Suderevsky wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I've tested patch provided by Kyotaro and do confirm it fixes the
> >>> issue.
> >>
> >> The patch looks good to me. Attached is the updated version of the
> >> patch.
> >> I updated only comments.
> >>
> >> Barring any objection, I will commit this patch.
> > The patch looks good to me.
> > 
> >>> Any chance it will be merged to one of the next minor releases?
> >>
> >> This doesn't seem a bug, so I'm thinking to merge this to next *major*
> >> version release, i.e., v13.
> > Not a bug, perhaps, but I think we do consider back-patching
> > performance problems. The rise in S3 usage has just exposed how poorly
> > this performed code in high-latency environments.
> 
> I understood the situation and am fine to back-patch that. But I'm not
> sure
> if it's fair to do that. Maybe we need to hear more opinions about
> this?
> OTOH, feature freeze for v13 is today, so what about committing the
> patch
> in v13 at first, and then doing the back-patch after hearing opinions
> and
> receiving many +1?

+1 for commit only v13 today, then back-patch if people wants and/or
accepts.

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center