On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday, June 07, 2012 05:51:07 PM Simon Riggs wrote: >> On 7 June 2012 14:50, Heikki Linnakangas >> >> <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> > These changes will help the XLogInsert scaling patch >> >> ...and as I'm sure you're aware will junk much of the replication code >> and almost certainly set back the other work that we have brewing for >> 9.3. So this is a very large curve ball you're throwing there. > It's not that bad. Most of that code is pretty abstracted, the changes to > adapt to that should be less than 20 lines. And it would remove some of the > complexity. > >> Personally, I don't think we should do this until we have a better >> regression test suite around replication and recovery because the >> impact will be huge but I welcome the suggested changes themselves. > Hm. One could regard the logical rep stuff as a testsuite ;) > >> If you are going to do this in 9.3, then it has to be early in the >> first Commit Fest and you'll need to be around to quickly follow >> through on all of the other subsequent breakages it will cause, >> otherwise every other piece of work in this area will be halted or >> delayed. > Yea, I would definitely welcome an early patch.
Just as I'm sure everybody else would welcome *your* patches landing in the first commitfest and that you all guarantee to be around quickly follow through on all potential breakages *that* can cause. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers