Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to postgrespro.com

Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers
Date
Msg-id [email protected]
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers  (Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>)
Responses Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 3:02 PM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The tag is applied, though for some reason the pgsql-committers auto
>> e-mail about new tags hasn't been working lately.

> Thanks. FWIW I did get the automated email shortly after you sent this email.

Yeah, it did show up here too, about an hour after I pushed the tag.
The last several taggings have been delayed similarly, and I think
at least one never was reported at all.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: DROP relation IF EXISTS Docs and Tests - Bug Fix
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: logtape.c stats don't account for unused "prefetched" block numbers