From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org,
        Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Allow concurrent-safe open() and fopen() in frontend code
 for Wi
In-reply-to: <20180917114113.GA31460@paquier.xyz>
References: <E1g0cYN-0003oE-IE@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <23543.1536938575@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20180914224939.GA1178@paquier.xyz>
 <20180917114113.GA31460@paquier.xyz>
Comments: In-reply-to Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
	message dated "Mon, 17 Sep 2018 20:41:13 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <17193.1537191697.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 09:41:37 -0400
Message-ID: <17194.1537191697@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> OK, REL_11_STABLE has been patched as well, after doing a couple of
> extra tests on Windows.

BTW, I'm a bit concerned by the fact that bowerbird has failed its
last couple of HEAD runs at the pgbench step.  The first such
failure was here:

https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=3Dbowerbird&dt=3D2=
018-09-15%2014%3A19%3A58

Looking at the set of commits between the prior run and that one,
it's hard to see anything that could have triggered the test failures
other than this patch --- but I also don't see how this patch would've
blown up pgbench without breaking earlier tests.  Ideas?

			regards, tom lane