On 22 November 2017 at 08:35, Robert Haas
wrote:
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs
wrote:
I would have acted on this myself a few days back if I thought the
patch was correct, but I see multiple command counter increments
there, so suspect an alternate fix is correct.
Oh, well, I'
On 22 November 2017 at 08:35, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I would have acted on this myself a few days back if I thought the
>> patch was correct, but I see multiple command counter increments
>> there, so suspect an alternate fix is correct.
>
> Oh
On 22 November 2017 at 05:35, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs
> wrote:
> > I would have acted on this myself a few days back if I thought the
> > patch was correct, but I see multiple command counter increments
> > there, so suspect an alternate fix is correct.
On 22 November 2017 at 02:27, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Craig Ringer
> wrote:
> > On 15 November 2017 at 21:12, Thomas Rosenstein
> > wrote:
> >> I would like somebody to consider Petr Jelineks patch for worker.c from
> >> here
> >> (https://www.postgresql.org/messag
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 6:35 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I would have acted on this myself a few days back if I thought the
>> patch was correct, but I see multiple command counter increments
>> there, so suspect an alternate fix is correct.
>
>
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I would have acted on this myself a few days back if I thought the
> patch was correct, but I see multiple command counter increments
> there, so suspect an alternate fix is correct.
Oh, well, I'm glad you said something. I was actually think
On 21 November 2017 at 16:13, Thomas Rosenstein
wrote:
> To weigh in here, I actually find it's a big hurdle
>
> I'm a postgres user and not a postgres dev, so I definitly have the feeling
> I'm not qualified to answer if this really does what it's intended todo.
> Further more not beeing in the
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Simon Riggs
wrote:
You realize we're talking about a bug fix, right? And for a feature
that was developed and committed by your colleagues?
Craig is asking Thomas to confirm the proposed bug fix works. How is
this not normal?
That's not exactly how I read Cr
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> You realize we're talking about a bug fix, right? And for a feature
>> that was developed and committed by your colleagues?
>
> Craig is asking Thomas to confirm the proposed bug fix works. How is
> this not normal?
That's not exactly how I
On 21 November 2017 at 13:27, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> On 15 November 2017 at 21:12, Thomas Rosenstein
>> wrote:
>>> I would like somebody to consider Petr Jelineks patch for worker.c from
>>> here
>>> (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/619
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 15 November 2017 at 21:12, Thomas Rosenstein
> wrote:
>> I would like somebody to consider Petr Jelineks patch for worker.c from
>> here
>> (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/619c557d-93e6-1833-1692-b010b176ff77%402ndquadrant.com)
>>
>
On 15 November 2017 at 21:12, Thomas Rosenstein <
thomas.rosenst...@creamfinance.com> wrote:
> I would like somebody to consider Petr Jelineks patch for worker.c from
> here (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/619c557d-93e6-1833-16
> 92-b010b176ff77%402ndquadrant.com)
>
> I'm was facing the sam
12 matches
Mail list logo
