As a status note, the above patch has not been run through pg_indent and
while I have run make check-world on linux (passed) and a non-Linux system
(which failed both with and without my patch) I will be making one more
small revision before final submission unless anyone thinks I need to
change ap
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM Chris Travers
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:08 AM Chris Travers
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, so here's my current patch (work in progress). I have not run tests
>> yet, and finding a way to add a test case is virtually impossible though I
>> expect we will find ways
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:08 AM Chris Travers
wrote:
> Ok, so here's my current patch (work in progress). I have not run tests
> yet, and finding a way to add a test case is virtually impossible though I
> expect we will find ways of using gdb to confirm local fix later.
>
> After careful code r
Ok, so here's my current patch (work in progress). I have not run tests
yet, and finding a way to add a test case is virtually impossible though I
expect we will find ways of using gdb to confirm local fix later.
After careful code review, I settled on the following approach which seemed
to be th
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 10:13 AM Chris Travers wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:55 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:40 PM Chris Travers
>> > wrote:
>> > >> Do you mean this loop in dsm_impl_posix_resize() is getting
>> > >> interrupted constantly and never completing?
>> > >
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:55 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-09-05 18:48:44 +0200, Chris Travers wrote:
> > Will submit a patch here shortly. Thanks! Should we do for master and
> > 10? Or 9.6 too?
>
> Please don't top-post on this list. This needs to be done in all
> branches where
Hi,
On 2018-09-05 18:48:44 +0200, Chris Travers wrote:
> Will submit a patch here shortly. Thanks! Should we do for master and
> 10? Or 9.6 too?
Please don't top-post on this list. This needs to be done in all
branches where the posix_fallocate call is present.
> > Yep, Maybe we should chec
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:49 AM Chris Travers wrote:
>
> Will submit a patch here shortly. Thanks! Should we do for master and 10?
> Or 9.6 too?
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:40 PM Chris Travers wrote:
>>
>> Yep, Maybe we should check for signals there.
Yeah, it seems reasonable to check for
Will submit a patch here shortly. Thanks! Should we do for master and
10? Or 9.6 too?
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:40 PM Chris Travers
wrote:
> Yep, Maybe we should check for signals there.
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:27 PM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:23 AM Chris Traver
Yep, Maybe we should check for signals there.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:27 PM Thomas Munro
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:23 AM Chris Travers
> wrote:
> > 1. The query is in a parallel index scan or similar
> > 2. A process is executing a parallel plan and allocating a significant
> chunk
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:23 AM Chris Travers wrote:
> 1. The query is in a parallel index scan or similar
> 2. A process is executing a parallel plan and allocating a significant chunk
> of memory (2MB for example) in dynamic shared memory.
> 3. The startup process goes into a loop where it se
11 matches
Mail list logo
