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