| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Steve Singer <steve(at)ssinger(dot)info>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |
| Date: | 2016-04-18 13:41:28 |
| Message-ID: | 12964.1460986888@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> I understand the backpatching pain argument, but my opinion was the
>> contrary of yours even so.
> The other possibility would be to backpatch the no-op patch which
> just uses the new syntax without any change in semantics.
That would break 3rd-party extensions in a minor release, wouldn't it?
Or do I misunderstand your suggestion?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-04-18 13:48:35 | Re: Suspicious behaviour on applying XLOG_HEAP2_VISIBLE. |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-04-18 13:18:51 | Re: Suspicious behaviour on applying XLOG_HEAP2_VISIBLE. |