On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 3:19 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> And here you go for all the three branches, with all the tests
> passing. This change is complicated enough that it would be better to
> get more eyes on the three patches for these specific branches. Now,
> this is much simpler since we don't have to worry about the
> prefetching.
Thanks! Yeah.
> For these versions, it struck me that we *require* 6860198 so as the
> header validation is able to correctly happen across page reads when
> doing crash recovery. I have added this change in the patches
> attached for simplicity, but 6860198 should be applied first on 12~14
> as an independent change. I can do that as a first step, if you are
> OK with that.
Ahhhh, that explains why back-patching was unexpectedly unsuccessful
when I tried it. I have added Fujii-san to the CC list. I don't see
any problem with that plan but it would be good to hear from him.