Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3e0713d2-56d2-9883-4213-d5ba7f0dcabf@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.
Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/04/07 4:04, David Steele wrote: > On 4/6/20 1:43 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: >> >> >> On 2020/03/19 22:22, Pavel Suderevsky wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've tested patch provided by Kyotaro and do confirm it fixes the issue. >> >> The patch looks good to me. Attached is the updated version of the patch. >> I updated only comments. >> >> Barring any objection, I will commit this patch. > > The patch looks good to me. > >>> Any chance it will be merged to one of the next minor releases? >> >> This doesn't seem a bug, so I'm thinking to merge this to next *major* >> version release, i.e., v13. > > Not a bug, perhaps, but I think we do consider back-patching performance problems. The rise in S3 usage has just exposedhow poorly this performed code in high-latency environments. I understood the situation and am fine to back-patch that. But I'm not sure if it's fair to do that. Maybe we need to hear more opinions about this? OTOH, feature freeze for v13 is today, so what about committing the patch in v13 at first, and then doing the back-patch after hearing opinions and receiving many +1? Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: