On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Changing the unit setting would also be a behavioral change. I think
>>> what Bruce is suggesting is that this is simply not worth worrying about
>>> in the back branches.
>> It seems pretty strange not to at least document it. And I'm not wild
>> about adding documentation that says "Even though this value purports
>> to be in kilobytes, it's really not", but I guess we can.
> Uh, no, the suggestion is to do *nothing* in the back branches. Yes
> they're buggy, but without any field complaints, it's hard to argue that
> anyone much cares. And I agree with Greg Smith that for anyone who does
> care, a behavioral change in a minor release is much harder to deal with
> than a change at a major release.
OK, so I talked to Bruce about this and I guess I've been persuaded
that we should just apply the patch I sent upthread to HEAD and leave
the back-branches broken, for fear of creating an incompatibility.
I'll go do that unless someone wants to argue further...
The Enterprise Postgres Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2010-07-06 18:49:37|
|Subject: Re: t_self as system column|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-07-06 17:49:42|
|Subject: Re: Partitioning syntax|
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2010-07-06 19:18:19|
|Subject: pgsql: Update pgindent testing instructions.|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-07-06 15:29:38|
|Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and comments to say bytes not kilobytes.|