On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:03 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Pavan Deolasee
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> + /*
>>> +*
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> + /*
>> +* Compute targetRecOff. It should typically be greater than short
>> +* page-header
On 1 April 2016 at 21:30, Craig Ringer wrote:
> I'll attach the new testcase once I either get it to reproduce this bug or
> give up and leave the basic xlogdump testcase alone.
>
I had another bash at this and I still can't reproduce it on master using
the giant commit
On 31 March 2016 at 16:13, Andres Freund wrote:
> It's probably easier to just generate a humongous commit record. You can
> do so by having a *lot* of subtransactions. Relatively easy to do with
> plpgsql by creating them in a loop (SELECT txid_current() in EXCEPTION
>
On 2016-03-31 09:41:46 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can you describe the process used to generate the sample WAL segment?
> >
> >
> Shame that I can't find the sql file used to create the problematic WAL
>
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
>
> Can you describe the process used to generate the sample WAL segment?
>
>
Shame that I can't find the sql file used to create the problematic WAL
segment. But this is what I did.
I wrote a plpgsql function which
On 23 March 2016 at 18:04, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Michael Paquier <
> michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> + /*
>> +* Compute targetRecOff. It should typically be greater than short
>> +* page-header since
On 23 March 2016 at 18:04, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Michael Paquier <
> michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> + /*
>> +* Compute targetRecOff. It should typically be greater than short
>> +* page-header since
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> It's definitely too late for that; they're going to be wrapped in a
> couple hours.
I have added this patch to the next CF so as we do not lose track of this bug:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/10/593/
--
Michael
On 2016-03-28 13:21:41 +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I'd just add dots at the end of the sentences in the comment blocks
> > because that's project style, but I'm being picky, except that the
> >
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> I'd just add dots at the end of the sentences in the comment blocks
> because that's project style, but I'm being picky, except that the
> logic looks quite good.
>
Since this is a bug affecting all stable
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> + /*
>> +* Compute targetRecOff. It should typically be greater than short
>> +* page-header
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
> + /*
> +* Compute targetRecOff. It should typically be greater than short
> +* page-header since a valid record can't , but can also be zero
> when
> +* caller has supplied a
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Pavan Deolasee
wrote:
> While investigating some issue, I found that pg_xlogdump fails to dump
> contents from a WAL file if the file has continuation data from previous WAL
> record and the data spans more than one page. In such cases,
>
14 matches
Mail list logo