Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 563BFDBC.3010901@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: GIN data corruption bug(s) in 9.6devel
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 11/06/2015 01:05 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Tomas Vondra > <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: ... >> >> I can do that - I see there are three patches in the two threads: >> >> 1) gin_pending_lwlock.patch (Jeff Janes) >> 2) gin_pending_pagelock.patch (Jeff Janes) >> 3) gin_alone_cleanup-2.patch (Teodor Sigaev) >> >> Should I test all of them? Or is (1) obsoleted by (2) for example? > > 1 is obsolete. Either 2 or 3 should fix the bug, provided this is the > bug you are seeing. They have different performance side effects, but > as far as fixing the bug they should be equivalent. OK, I'll do testing with those two patches then, and I'll also note the performance difference (the data load was very stable). Of course, it's just one particular workload. I'll post an update after the weekend. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: