On Thursday, June 07, 2012 06:02:12 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Andres Freund <andres@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.linnakangas@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.
Agreed.
Andres
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services