On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 12:12 AM Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 3:25 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 12:14 AM Masahiko Sawada
> > wrote:
> > > IIUC we've discussed the field-and-value style vacuum option. I
> > > suggested that since we have already the
From: Tsunakawa, Takayuki [mailto:tsunakawa.ta...@jp.fujitsu.com]
> From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI [mailto:horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp]
> > +if (setsockopt(conn->sock, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_USER_TIMEOUT,
> > + (char *) &timeout, sizeof(timeout)) < 0 && errno !=
> > ENOPROTOOPT)
> > +{
>
Hello Raymond,
Note that this does not mean that the patch should not be applied, it
looks like an oversight, but really I do not have the performance
degradation you are suggesting.
I appreciate your input and I want to come up with a canonical test that
makes this contention more obvious
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 11:27 PM Amit Kapila
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:53 AM Haribabu Kommi
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:08 PM Amit Kapila
> wrote:
> >>
> >> As part of this thread, maybe we can
> >> just fix the case of the parallel cooperating transaction.
> >
> >
> > Wit
101 - 104 of 104 matches
Mail list logo