| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sergey Burladyan <eshkinkot(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade and epoch |
| Date: | 2014-09-06 13:30:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20140906133006.GA29540@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 07:35:42PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:26:55AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > > I have developed the attached patch which causes pg_upgrade to preserve
> > > the transaction epoch. I plan to apply this for PG 9.5.
> >
> > I would say this is a simple bug and should be back patched to 9.4 and
> > 9.3. We're only going to continue to get complaints from people
> > running into this.
>
> Yes, I did think about that, but it seems like a behavior change.
> However, it is tempting to avoid future bug reports about this.
When this came up in March, Tom and I agreed that this wasn't something
we wanted to slip into 9.4. Given that, it is hard to argue we should
now slip this into 9.5, 9.4, and 9.3, so unless someone else votes for
inclusion, I think I will leave this as 9.5-only.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2014-09-06 13:32:08 | Re: plpgsql defensive mode |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-09-06 13:24:30 | Re: PL/pgSQL 1.2 |