Re: gitlab post-mortem: pg_basebackup waiting for checkpoint
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-04-01T15:29:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Am Montag, den 27.02.2017, 16:20 +0100 schrieb Magnus Hagander: >> > On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> > Is there an argument for back-patching this? >> > >> > >> > Seems you were typing that at the same time as we did. >> > >> > >> > I'm considering it, but not swayed in either direction. Should I take >> > your comment as a vote that we should back-patch it? >> >> I've checked back into this thread, and there seems to be a +1 from Tom >> and a +(0.5-1) from Simon for backpatching, and no obvious -1s. Did you >> decide against it in the end, or is this still an open item? > > > No, I plan to work on it, so it's still an open item. I've been backlogged > with other things, but I will try to get too it soon. > > (This also includes considering Jeff's note) > > I've applied a backpatch to 9.4. Prior to that pretty much the entire patch is a conflict, so it would need a full rewrite. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Commits
-
Back-patch checkpoint clarification docs and pg_basebackup updates
- bd34e7f19b40 9.4.12 landed
- 2843d5d657be 9.5.7 landed
- b88b929a7071 9.6.3 landed