Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> >> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> >>> AFAIR nothing's been done about it, so it's a TODO.
> >> >
> >> >> I was thinking of adding it to the 9.1 open items list, but the wiki's
> >> >> been down every time I've tried to go there.
> >> >
> >> > Since the problem's been there since forever, I don't see that it's an
> >> > open item for 9.1. ?That list normally is for "must fix before ship"
> >> > items, not development projects.
> >>
> >> OK. ?If you don't feel it warrants being on that list, then the TODO
> >> is OK with me.
> >
> > Agreed. ?Do you want me to do it, or will you?
>
> You do it. :-)
Done:
Restructure truncation logic is more resistant to failure
This also involves not writing dirty buffers for a truncated or
dropped relation
*
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-08/msg01032.php
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
