Re: RC1 blocker issues

From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RC1 blocker issues
Date: 2006-11-24 22:07:07
Message-ID: 1077.24.211.165.134.1164406027.squirrel@www.dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> * possible rearrangement of pg_stat column order:
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00643.php
>> Should we do this, and if so should we force initdb (via a catversion
>> change)? I'm currently leaning to the thought that if we change it
>> we should force initdb, else we'll risk having a noticeable user-visible
>> difference between different "8.2" installations.
>
> Actually, on looking closer, we *must* force initdb because this changes
> the expected output for the rules regression test.
>
> So, yea or nay? I'm working up the patch right now, but will hold off
> applying until I hear some comments.
>

Fixing it later would be nastier, or impossible. I think we should fix it
now. We don't have an absolute promise not to require an initdb during
beta, do we?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-11-24 22:23:51 Re: Error in from_char() for field 'D'?
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2006-11-24 22:05:03 Re: RC1 blocker issues