On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:14:35AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Thanks. If there are no objections, then I will try to wrap this stuff
>> on Thursday my time.
>
> And done down to 9.4.
Thank you!
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:14:35AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Thanks. If there are no objections, then I will try to wrap this stuff
> on Thursday my time.
And done down to 9.4.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:25:55PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Thank you for updating the patch. The patch looks fine to me, and I
> agree with all changes you made.
Thanks. If there are no objections, then I will try to wrap this stuff
on Thursday my time.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Descript
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 05:13:27PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> This concerns as well v10, so that's not actually an open item...
>> Well, it was an open item last year. The last set of patches is from
>> Simon here:
>> https://www.post
On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 05:13:27PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> This concerns as well v10, so that's not actually an open item...
> Well, it was an open item last year. The last set of patches is from
> Simon here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANP8%2BjLwgsexwdPkBtkN5kdHN5TwV-d%3Di31
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 10:15:02AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> I've added this to Open Items so as not to forget.
This concerns as well v10, so that's not actually an open item...
Well, it was an open item last year. The last set of patches is from
Simon here:
https://www.postgresql.org/messa
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 11:11 PM, David Steele wrote:
> On 4/10/18 6:14 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16,
On 4/10/18 6:14 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs
wrot
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
On 16 January 2018 at 06:21, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>>> On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> We're not talking about standbys, so the message is incorrect.
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:40:43AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> We're not talking about standbys, so the message is incorrect.
>
> Ah, I understood. How about "\"%s\" has now caught
On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
>>> This patch appears to cause this DEBUG1 message
>>>
>>> "standby \"%s\" has now caught up with primary"
>>>
>>> which probably isn't the right message, but might be OK to backpatch.
>>>
On 9 January 2018 at 04:36, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> This patch appears to cause this DEBUG1 message
>>
>> "standby \"%s\" has now caught up with primary"
>>
>> which probably isn't the right message, but might be OK to backpatch.
>>
>> Thoughts on better wording?
>>
>
> I think that this DEBUG1
On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 7:50 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 26 December 2017 at 00:26, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
>> wrote:
>>> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
dire
On 26 December 2017 at 00:26, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
> wrote:
>> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>>
>>> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
>>> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so that we ca
Moin,
On Tue, December 26, 2017 5:26 am, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Tels
> wrote:
>> Moin,
>>
>> On Mon, December 25, 2017 7:26 pm, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
>>> wrote:
On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Tels wrote:
> Moin,
>
> On Mon, December 25, 2017 7:26 pm, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
>> wrote:
>>> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
>
Moin,
On Mon, December 25, 2017 7:26 pm, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
> wrote:
>> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>>
>>> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
>>> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Petr Jelinek
wrote:
> On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>>
>> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
>> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so that we can
>> check the read LSN and set WalSndCaughtUp = true even aft
On 21/11/17 22:06, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so that we can
> check the read LSN and set WalSndCaughtUp = true even after read a
> record without wait. Attached updated patch pas
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> After investigation, I found out that my previous patch was wrong
> direction. I should have changed XLogSendLogical() so that we can
> check the read LSN and set WalSndCaughtUp = true even after read a
> record without wait. Attached updat
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Masahiko Sawada
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
I’m not entirely sure why this was flagged as
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Vaishnavi Prabakaran
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> I’m not entirely sure why this was flagged as "Waiting for Author” by the
>>> automatic run, the patch applie
25 matches
Mail list logo
