Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can someone explain why configure/platform-specific flags are allowed to
> be added at this stage in the release, but my pgmonitor patch was
> rejected?
Possibly just because Marc hasn't stomped on me quite yet ;-)
However, I can actually make a case for this: we are flushing out
performance bugs in a new feature, ie WAL.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsyn... Larry Rosenman
- Testing structure (was) Re: [HACKER... Justin Clift
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done ... Justin Clift
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be d... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via ... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done ... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be d... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SY... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via ... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via ... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SY... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via ... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done ... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be d... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsyn... Bruce Momjian
