On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 05:41:04PM -0500, Michael K. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:36:13AM -0500, Michael K. Johnson wrote:
> > https://opensource.sas.com/its/browse/CNY-3834 filed for this issue.
> > 
> > The good news is that it's unlikely to affect new repository imports,
> > so it shouldn't put any work on F20 import on hold.  The foresight
> > repository is one of the larger repositories out there.
> 
> I built conary with the expected workaround for this issue applied and
> put it on the repository server.  Let me know how it goes...

The workaround (which worked but involved reverting a Conary patch so
was not a good long-term solution) has been replaced with what is
expected to be the good long-term fix for this issue.  Since the root
of the problem was that postgres was planning the query poorly, we
cannot be 100% certain that the problem is resolved without confirming
in situ.  So I would appreciate it if the next person to build something
into the foresight repository would watch to see whether the problem is
still gone, and post a response to this email with the results either
way.

Thanks

_______________________________________________
Foresight-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.foresightlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel

Reply via email to