About that re-release ...

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Assuming that we can get a fix for the fsync-failure-during-restart
problem committed by the end of the week, there will be a new set of
back-branch minor releases next week. Usual schedule, wrap Monday
for public announcement Thursday.

What about /messages/by-id/20150527222142.GE5885@postgresql.org
?

I believe that is also a 9.4.2 regression, and a serious one.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Assuming that we can get a fix for the fsync-failure-during-restart
problem committed by the end of the week, there will be a new set of
back-branch minor releases next week. Usual schedule, wrap Monday
for public announcement Thursday.

What about /messages/by-id/20150527222142.GE5885@postgresql.org
?

I believe that is also a 9.4.2 regression, and a serious one.

Oh? There was nothing in the thread that suggested to me that it was
a new-in-9.4.2 bug.

regards, tom lane

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

Assuming that we can get a fix for the fsync-failure-during-restart
problem committed by the end of the week, there will be a new set of
back-branch minor releases next week. Usual schedule, wrap Monday
for public announcement Thursday.

What about /messages/by-id/20150527222142.GE5885@postgresql.org
?

I believe that is also a 9.4.2 regression, and a serious one.

Oh? There was nothing in the thread that suggested to me that it was
a new-in-9.4.2 bug.

I think it is.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 5/28/2015 5:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

Assuming that we can get a fix for the fsync-failure-during-restart
problem committed by the end of the week, there will be a new set of
back-branch minor releases next week. Usual schedule, wrap Monday
for public announcement Thursday.

regards, tom lane

Tom,
thanks for the advise.
I will postpone the deployment of new packages for cygwin
until 9.4.3 will be available.

Regards
Marco

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

What about /messages/by-id/20150527222142.GE5885@postgresql.org
?

I believe that is also a 9.4.2 regression, and a serious one.

Oh? There was nothing in the thread that suggested to me that it was
a new-in-9.4.2 bug.

I think it is.

The executive summary here is that 9.4.2 and 9.3.7 fail to start if
pg_control's oldestMultiXid points to a pg_multixact/offsets file that
does not exist. Earlier versions tolerated that, but the new versions
don't. So people who have this situation will be unable to start the
database after upgrading. That's quite bad.

However, the new set of releases is not entirely responsible for the
problem, because the situation that causes 9.4.2 and 9.3.7 to fail to
start isn't supposed to occur. The database really SHOULD NOT remove
an offsets file that does not precede oldestMultiXid, and if it does,
then either oldestMultiXid is set wrong (which would be a bug), or the
database removed an offsets file to which references may still exist
(which would be a data loss issue). Thomas Munro, Alvaro, and I have
been discussing this on Skype, but have so far been unable to
construct a series of events which would lead to an occurrence of this
kind. We speculate that pg_upgrade may play a role, but there's no
proof of that.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 05/28/2015 02:37 AM, Marco Atzeri wrote:

On 5/28/2015 5:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

Assuming that we can get a fix for the fsync-failure-during-restart
problem committed by the end of the week, there will be a new set of
back-branch minor releases next week. Usual schedule, wrap Monday
for public announcement Thursday.

regards, tom lane

Tom,
thanks for the advise.
I will postpone the deployment of new packages for cygwin
until 9.4.3 will be available.

You're doing the cygwin packages? You should probably be on the
packagers list, then, no?

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 5/28/2015 7:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:

On 05/28/2015 02:37 AM, Marco Atzeri wrote:

On 5/28/2015 5:00 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

Assuming that we can get a fix for the fsync-failure-during-restart
problem committed by the end of the week, there will be a new set of
back-branch minor releases next week. Usual schedule, wrap Monday
for public announcement Thursday.

regards, tom lane

Tom,
thanks for the advise.
I will postpone the deployment of new packages for cygwin
until 9.4.3 will be available.

You're doing the cygwin packages? You should probably be on the
packagers list, then, no?

There is a dedicate packagers mailing list ?

I don't see one on:
http://www.postgresql.org/list/

Could you clarify ?
Marco

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers