Re: [HACKERS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Christophe Pettus <christophe(dot)pettus(at)pgexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
Date: 2017-09-26 22:18:53
Message-ID: 32160eb9-60df-746b-bbc0-dd232b993d6d@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On 09/26/2017 06:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/26/2017 05:45 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I've not been following along very closely- are we sure that ripping
>> this out won't be worse than dealing with it in-place? Will pulling it
>> out also require a post-RC1 catversion bump?
>>
>>
>
> It shouldn't do AFAIK - the function signatures weren't changed.
>

At this stage on reflection I agree it should be pulled :-(

I'm not happy about the idea of marking an input function as not
parallel safe, certainly not without a good deal of thought and
discussion that we don't have time for this cycle.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-09-26 22:49:39 Re: [HACKERS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2017-09-26 22:04:26 Re: [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Euler Taveira 2017-09-26 22:25:25 Re: Logical Replication - test_decoding - unchanged-toast-datum
Previous Message Jeff Janes 2017-09-26 22:15:39 Re: v10 pg_ctl compatibility