| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Asko Tiidumaa <asko(dot)tiidumaa(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family |
| Date: | 2010-07-03 15:47:53 |
| Message-ID: | 11348.1278172073@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-02/msg00174.php
> I wonder if we should think about back-patching just the syscache.h
> portion of that patch. It would simplify back-patching, and might
> make life easier for people trying to write extensions that are
> compatible with multiple PG versions, too.
Not sure. Maybe it will make back-patching a bit easier, but we don't
normally consider back-patching cosmetic changes, which is what this
really is.
I don't buy the suggestion that third-party extensions would be able
to rely on it across versions. They can't know if they're going to be
compiled against the latest minor release or not. So it's just a
question of whether it'll improve matters enough for our own
back-patches.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | subham | 2010-07-03 17:04:33 | Needs Suggestion |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-07-03 15:32:09 | Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay |