On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 06:37:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Generally it's considered poor form to push any inessential patches
> during a release window (which I'd define roughly as 48 hours before
> the wrap till after the tag is applied). It complicates the picture
> for the final round of buil
David Rowley writes:
>>> You may want to hold on until 14beta1 is tagged, though.
>> Of course we can wait till that day but I wonder why.
> I imagined that would be a good idea for more risky patches so we
> don't break something before a good round of buildfarm testing.
> However, since this i
On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 17:18, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 09:33:27AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> Me too. Let's backpatch.
> >
> > A README is not directly user-facing, it is here for developers, so I
> > would not really bother with a backpatch. Now it is not a big deal
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 09:33:27AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Me too. Let's backpatch.
>
> A README is not directly user-facing, it is here for developers, so I
> would not really bother with a backpatch. Now it is not a big deal to
> do so either, so that's not a -1 from me, more a +0, for
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 09:33:27AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Me too. Let's backpatch.
A README is not directly user-facing, it is here for developers, so I
would not really bother with a backpatch. Now it is not a big deal to
do so either, so that's not a -1 from me, more a +0, for "please fee
> On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 16:45, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Would you like to push the patch?
>
> Yeah, I can. I was just letting it sit for a while to see if anyone
> else had an opinion about backpatching.
Ok.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanes
On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 16:45, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Would you like to push the patch?
Yeah, I can. I was just letting it sit for a while to see if anyone
else had an opinion about backpatching.
David
David,
>> Thanks for working on that. I had a look and wondered if it might be
>> better to go into slightly less details about the exact atomic
>> function to use. The wording there might lead you to believe you can
>> just call the atomic function on the non-atomic variable.
>>
>> It might be
> Thanks for working on that. I had a look and wondered if it might be
> better to go into slightly less details about the exact atomic
> function to use. The wording there might lead you to believe you can
> just call the atomic function on the non-atomic variable.
>
> It might be best just to
On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 01:29, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Yes, we'd better to fix them. Attached is a propsal for these.
Thanks for working on that. I had a look and wondered if it might be
better to go into slightly less details about the exact atomic
function to use. The wording there might lead yo
> Yeah looks like a typo to me.
Ok.
> I wonder if we also need to fix this part:
>
>> either one does their writes. Eventually we might be able to use an atomic
>> fetch-and-add instruction for this specific case on architectures that
>> support
>> it, but we can't rely on that being available
On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 00:11, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> I think there is a typo in src/backend/storage/lmgr/README.barrier.
> Attached patch should fix it.
Yeah looks like a typo to me.
I wonder if we also need to fix this part:
> either one does their writes. Eventually we might be able to use an
I think there is a typo in src/backend/storage/lmgr/README.barrier.
Attached patch should fix it.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jpdiff --git a/src/backend/storage/lmgr/README.barrier b/src/backend/stora
13 matches
Mail list logo
