Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2022 09:54:39 -0500
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
	Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
	Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>,
	Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>,
	Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>,
	Ilya Anfimov <ilan@tzirechnoy.com>
Subject: Re: XID formatting and SLRU refactorings (was: Add 64-bit XIDs into
 PostgreSQL 15)
Message-ID: <20220713145439.GC18011@telsasoft.com>
References: 
 <CACG=ezY10qUtZszJ+sv3cOzrVKZRvFFwbB1hMRBvN4T4BoM9xA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ7c6TO9+_G6MXsRxoxC2Luo65M3Tp+A860QCvhO6_d-6OBKYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <6e24403a-0afb-f053-60b8-3b983266454c@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAJ7c6TMZWP0K5WJGscL=9R_-zFsGpkUJ_RaPCWB81=R2=x0NFg@mail.gmail.com>
 <220fab30-dff0-b055-f803-4338219f1021@enterprisedb.com>
 <CAJ7c6TONjfwZds0DkP0cKZnGc9s+SWRkFkiYjE_O1fXTweuM6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACG=ezb3uLMQgYR4P07RQrcqj-Lmb6FO0ots6TnG8VKd-tqqnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACG=ezZFHdYhTuSZX5=5+vZvfxgtJawQgzsPhu9cEZnb7vSzGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ7c6TONjAzfPy44rOBFc0ydZVmnvHhNeGfeRwZ2t5qcB9D_dQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACG=ezY7vDaveMxwsQokzh+Mk32FmMa1PQJvGxfZA15-da6PNw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACG=ezY7vDaveMxwsQokzh+Mk32FmMa1PQJvGxfZA15-da6PNw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220713145439.GC18011%40telsasoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 04:21:29PM +0300, Maxim Orlov wrote:
> We have posted an updated version v34 of the whole patchset in [1].
> Changes of patches 0001-0003 there are identical to v33. So, no update is
> needed in this thread.

Is there any reason to continue with two separate threads and CF entries ?
The original reason was to have a smaller patch for considerate late in v15.

But right now, it just seems to cause every update to imply two email messages
rather than one.

Since the patch is split into 0001, 0002, 0003, 0004+, both can continue in the
main thread.  The early patches can still be applied independently from each
later patch (the same as with any other patch series).

Also, since this patch series is large, and expects a lot of conflicts, it
seems better to update the cfapp with a "git link" [0] where you can maintain a
rebased branch.  It avoids the need to mail new patches to the list several
times more often than it's being reviewed.

[0] Note that cirrusci will run the same checks as cfbot if you push a branch
to github.