On 9/19/19 3:11 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 18.09.2019 23:31, John Snow wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 9/10/19 9:23 AM, John Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/10/19 4:19 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 04:01:52PM -0400, John Snow wrote:
>
>
> On 8/21/19 10:41 AM,
On 8/21/19 10:41 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 09.08.2019 23:13, John Snow wrote:
>> Backup jobs may yield prior to installing their handler, because of the
>> job_co_entry shim which guarantees that a job won't begin work until
>> we are ready to start an entire transaction.
>>
>> U
09.08.2019 23:13, John Snow wrote:
> Backup jobs may yield prior to installing their handler, because of the
> job_co_entry shim which guarantees that a job won't begin work until
> we are ready to start an entire transaction.
>
> Unfortunately, this makes proving correctness about transactional
>
ping, y'all
On 8/9/19 4:13 PM, John Snow wrote:
> Backup jobs may yield prior to installing their handler, because of the
> job_co_entry shim which guarantees that a job won't begin work until
> we are ready to start an entire transaction.
>
> Unfortunately, this makes proving correctness about t
Backup jobs may yield prior to installing their handler, because of the
job_co_entry shim which guarantees that a job won't begin work until
we are ready to start an entire transaction.
Unfortunately, this makes proving correctness about transactional
points-in-time for backup hard to reason about
