On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 06:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 3:13 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 21:25 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > > >> I have what I believe is > >> an equivalent but simpler implementation, which is attached. > > > > There's no code comments to explain this, so without in-depth analysis > > of the problem, Masao's patch and this one its not possible to say > > anything. > > > > Please explain in detail why its the right approach and put that in a > > comment, so we'll understand now and in the future. > > The explanation is what I wrote in my previous email: a smart shutdown > request during recovery should be treated the same way BEFORE the > postmaster has been asked to start the background writer and AFTER the > postmaster has been asked to start the background writer. I'll think > up a suitable comment.
I think we should review Masao's patch and ask him to make any changes we think are appropriate. There's no benefit to have multiple patch authors at one time. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
