Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup

Hamid Akhtar <hamid.akhtar@gmail.com>

From: Hamid Akhtar <hamid.akhtar@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Asif Rehman <asifr.rehman@gmail.com>, Suraj Kharage <suraj.kharage@enterprisedb.com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>, Ahsan Hadi <ahsan.hadi@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, David Zhang <david.zhang@highgo.ca>, Kashif Zeeshan <kashif.zeeshan@enterprisedb.com>, Rajkumar Raghuwanshi <rajkumar.raghuwanshi@enterprisedb.com>, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2020-07-06T12:39:08Z
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. Fix failures in incremental_sort due to number of workers

  2. In jsonb_plpython.c, suppress warning message from gcc 10.

  3. Fix minor problems with non-exclusive backup cleanup.

On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 5:24 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:

> > On 12 Jun 2020, at 19:28, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am sure that nobody is arguing that the patch has to be beneficial
> > in all cases in order to justify applying it. However, there are
> > several good arguments against proceding with this patch:
>
> This thread has stalled with no resolution to the raised issues, and the
> latest
> version of the patch (v15) posted no longer applies (I only tried 0001
> which
> failed, the green tick in the CFBot is due it mistakenlt thinking an
> attached
> report is a patch).  I'm marking this patch Returned with Feedback.  Please
> open a new CF entry when there is a new version of the patch.
>
> cheers ./daniel


I think this is fair. There are quite a few valid points raised by Robert.


-- 
Highgo Software (Canada/China/Pakistan)
URL : www.highgo.ca
ADDR: 10318 WHALLEY BLVD, Surrey, BC
CELL:+923335449950  EMAIL: mailto:hamid.akhtar@highgo.ca
SKYPE: engineeredvirus