Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4a461c7b-b90a-6644-64a6-80eac69c27bc@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI.
Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/7/20 3:48 AM, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > At Tue, 7 Apr 2020 12:15:00 +0900, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote in >>>> 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 exposed how 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? > > +1 for commit only v13 today, then back-patch if people wants and/or > accepts. Definitely +1 for a commit today to v13. I certainly was not trying to hold that up. -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: