Re: pg_upgrade and epoch

On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 09:30:06AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 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.

With no one replying, I will consider this issue closed and not
backpatch this.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +