Dear hackers,
Thanks everyone who are working on the bug. IIUC the remained task is
to add code comments for avoiding the same mistake again described here:
> Sounds reasonable. As per analysis till now, it seems removal of new
> assert is correct and we just need to figure out the reason in all
2025年6月25日(水) 5:04 Nathan Bossart :
>
> Here is what I have staged for commit.
I had another look at this with reasonably eyeballs and can't see
any obvious issues (though can't discount that I'm suffering from "patch
blindness").
Many thanks to everyone who has contributed to this so far!
Regar
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 15:02, Alexandra Wang
wrote:
> I have attached the new patches.
Okay I finally found the time to look at this. I created a draft PR
for pg_duckdb[1] to see if I would run into issues. There was only one
real issue I found by doing this. The .* syntax is encoded as NULL in
r
At https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGConf.dev_2025_Developer_Meeting I
proposed a "review marketplace" experiment. Feedback at that developer
meeting improved on the proposal. I've implemented it at
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Review_Marketplace and have seeded the offer
book with one offer
> On 28 Jun 2025, at 00:37, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>
> Indeed.
After some experiments I could get unstable repro on my machine.
I've added some logging and that's what I've found:
2025-06-28 23:03:40.598 +05 [40887] 006_MultiXact_standby.pl WARNING: Timed
out: nextMXact 415832 tmpMXact 41582
