On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 03:23:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On 6/7/16 11:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >> > >> Moved to CLOSE_WAIT. > > > > Could you add an explanation on the wiki page about what this section means? > > Noah created that section. My interpretation is that it's supposed to > be for things we think are fixed, but maybe there's a chance they > aren't - like a performance problem that we've patched but not > received confirmation from the original reporter that the patch fixes > it for them. I'm inclined to think that most issues should just > become "resolved" right away.
Yep, pretty much that. CLOSE_WAIT is for performance defects, race conditions, and other defects where a successful fix is difficult to verify beyond reasonable doubt. Other things can move directly to "resolved". I don't mind if practice diverges from that intent, and I don't really process the two sections differently. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
