Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Chapman Flack
Тема Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility
Дата
Msg-id 5AADB130.2020206@anastigmatix.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 03/16/18 17:14, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> The attached patch adds the test, and a neccessary extension to check_pg_config
> to allow for extracting values from pg_config.h as opposed to just returning
> the number of regex matches. (needed for XLOG_BLCKSZ.)

Thanks for the review. I notice that cfbot has now flagged the patch as
failing, and when I look into it, it appears that cfbot is building with
your test patch, and without the xlog.c patch, and so the test naturally
fails. Does the cfbot require both patches to be attached to the same
email, in order to include them both? I'll try attaching both to this one,
and see what it does.

This is good confirmation that the test is effective. :)

-Chap

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SSL passphrase prompt external command
Следующее
От: Kefan Yang
Дата:
Сообщение: [GSoC 2018] Proposal Draft