From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Aleksandr Parfenov <a(dot)parfenov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL crashes with SIGSEGV |
Date: | 2018-01-17 19:23:18 |
Message-ID: | 14267.1516216998@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Aleksandr Parfenov <a(dot)parfenov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer
I don't feel particularly comfortable committing a patch that
was clearly labeled as a rushed draft by its author.
Peter, where do you stand on this work?
In a quick look at the patches, WIP-kludge-fix.patch seems clearly
unacceptable for back-patching because it changes the signature and
behavior of ExecResetTupleTable, which external code might well be using.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sergei Kornilov | 2018-01-17 19:26:15 | Re: Index-only scan returns incorrect results when using a composite GIST index with a gist_trgm_ops column. |
Previous Message | Ratnakar Tripathy | 2018-01-17 17:48:52 | Re: BUG #14947: Installation Errors |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sergei Kornilov | 2018-01-17 19:26:15 | Re: Index-only scan returns incorrect results when using a composite GIST index with a gist_trgm_ops column. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-01-17 19:09:35 | Re: Unnecessary static variable? |