On 2020/05/07 17:57, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:13 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
On 2020/05/02 20:40, Amit Kapila wrote:
I don't see any obvious problem with the changed code but we normally
don't backpatch performance improvements. I can see that the code
change here appears to be straight forward so it might be fine to
backpatch this. Have we seen similar reports earlier as well? AFAIK,
this functionality is for a long time and if people were facing this
on a regular basis then we would have seen such reports multiple
times. I mean to say if the chances of this hitting are less then we
can even choose not to backpatch this.
I found the following two reports. ISTM there are not so many reports...
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/16159-f5a34a3a04dc6...@postgresql.org
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/dd6690b0-ec03-6b3c-6fac-c963f91f87a7%40postgrespro.ru
The first seems to be the same where this bug has been fixed. It has
been moved to hackers in email [1].
Yes, that's the original report that leaded to the commit.
Am, I missing something?
Considering it has been encountered by two different people, I think
it would not be a bad idea to back-patch this.
+1 So I will do the back-patch.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
