this doesn't apply cleanly to head anymore, can you please post v21 ?
I would love to test it here :)
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On 2008-11-20, at 11:08, Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wrote:
this doesn't apply cleanly to head anymore, can you please post v21 ?
I would love to test it here :)
bollocks, it's already in cvs head - isn't it ? ... :D
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
Robert Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- However, having said that, it looks as if there is still a bit of
experimentation going on in terms of what you actually want the patch
to do. There are a couple of things that say FIXME or XXX, and at
least one diff hunk that adds code surrounded by
For the FIXMEs I don't have any problem leaving them in place. They're
warnings to future coders working in the same area of what they may have to do
to make the code more general.
That's fine with me. I think it's fine to document possibilities for
future development, but sometimes it's hard
Gregory Stark wrote:
The XXX is something that probably needs to be fixed but it's just a question
of what header file to put a declaration in. I couldn't find a good choice but
perhaps someone else has an idea?
For the FIXMEs I don't have any problem leaving them in place. They're
warnings to
Robert Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Looking forward to v20.
Here you go!
I addressed all the nitpicks and added comments.
I also stripped out the sequential i/o posix_fadvises. I'm kind of sad to see
them go since it did seem like a nice way to give more info to the OS even if
no OSes today
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are probably no rigid rules on this, but my interpretation of these tags
is usually this:
XXX -- not sure if this is the best way to do this, needs ideas
TODO -- specific ideas for improvement
FIXME -- broken, must be fixed to be usable
I
One thing which is bothering me is that the guc assign hook is throwing an
error if you set effective_io_concurrency when your system's posix_fadvise is
deemed inadequate (either unavailable or from an old version of glibc). I'm
starting to think it shouldn't throw an error, just not set the
I addressed all the nitpicks and added comments.
Woot, yeah for comments.
There's a trivial conflict with CVS HEAD due to unrelated changes to
AC_CHECK_FUNCS(...kitchen sink...) but that led me to notice something
else: can't all this stuff about posix_fallocate be ripped out of
configure.in at
Obviously that went too soon.
In config.sgml, the documentation is good, but suffers from a slightly
informal style. There are a lot of places where commas seem
appropriate but are not present. Suggested changes by paragraph:
1. Replace last sentence: Raising this value will cause
Robert Haas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was pretty leery about reviewing this one due to the feeling that I
might well be in over my head, but they talked me into it, so here
goes nothin'. Apologies in advance for any deficiencies in this
review.
- Overall, this looks pretty clean.
-
As this hasn't happened and I haven't been able to demonstrate it being useful
myself I guess it makes more sense to separate the two now and set the
sequential scan stuff aside until someone can demonstrate it being useful.
Sounds good. How soon do you think you can post updated patches?
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Gregory Stark wrote:
In particular I was hoping Zoltan who original reported the sequential
file strategy stuff being helpful might be able to see if this works for
him.
The original message there suggested it was particularly valuable when
working with a somewhat
- StrategyFileStrategy doesn't handle the recently added BAS_BULKWRITE
strategy. I'm not sure whether it needs to, but it seems to me that
this a trap for the unwary: we should probably add a comment where the
BAS_* constants are defined warning that any changes here may/will
also
I was pretty leery about reviewing this one due to the feeling that I
might well be in over my head, but they talked me into it, so here
goes nothin'. Apologies in advance for any deficiencies in this
review.
- Overall, this looks pretty clean. The style appears to be
consistent with the
Here is an updated posix_fadvise patch against CVS HEAD. It's my first patch
generated using git, yay. I remembered to strip out configure (WHY is that
STILL in CVS!?) and convert it to context diff, but if there's anything else
I've missed just shout.
Changes from before:
1) Based on
16 matches
Mail list logo
