Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation
Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
To: jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com
Cc: stark.cfm@gmail.com, hlinnaka@iki.fi, barwick@gmail.com,
jchampion@timescale.com, pryzby@telsasoft.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us,
rjuju123@gmail.com, jakub.wartak@tomtom.com,
pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-04-28T01:58:53Z
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 →
-
pg_dump: Refactor getIndexes()
- e2c52beecdea 15.0 cited
-
Optimize DropRelFileNodesAllBuffers() for recovery.
- bea449c635c0 14.0 cited
(I find the misspelled subject makes it difficult to find the thread..) At Thu, 27 Apr 2023 14:47:41 +0200, Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com> wrote in > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:55 AM Kyotaro Horiguchi > <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Rebased. > > > > I fixed some code comments and commit messages. I fixed the wrong > > arrangement of some changes among patches. Most importantly, I fixed > > the a bug based on a wrong assumption that init-fork is not resides on > > shared buffers. Now smgrDoPendingCleanups drops buffer for a init-fork > > to be removed. > > > > The new fourth patch is a temporary fix for recently added code, which > > will soon be no longer needed. This is no longer needed. Thank you, Thomas! > Hi Kyotaro, > > I've retested v28 of the patch with everything that came to my mind > (basic tests, --enable-tap-tests, restarts/crashes along adding the > data, checking if there were any files left over and I've checked for > stuff that earlier was causing problems: GiST on geometry[PostGIS]). Maybe it's fixed by dropping buffers. > The only thing I've not tested this time were the performance runs > done earlier. The patch passed all my very limited tests along with > make check-world. Patch looks good to me on the surface from a > usability point of view. I haven't looked at the code, so the patch > might still need an in-depth review. Thank you for conducting a thorough test. In this patchset, the first one might be useful on its own and it is the most complex part. I'll recheck it. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center