| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Run pgindent now? |
| Date: | 2015-05-25 17:36:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20150525173629.GI5885@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> What we need to consider right now is whether to include back branches
> in the existing practice of reindenting between development cycles.
> This is somewhat urgent because we already did HEAD, so we have already
> created a divergence from HEAD to 9.4 which is going to cause us pain
> one way or the other. (It's worth noting for example that Bruce's
> trial run of pgindent on 9.4 hit some of the code involved in the
> fsync-the-whole-data-directory patch, which means that whatever we decide
> to do about that is likely to stumble over pgindent diffs if we don't
> re-indent the back branches. So I'm not talking about potential pain
> in the vague future, I'm talking about this week.)
FWIW the multixact code is now slightly different between HEAD and
9.3/9.4, also. So if that needs further patches, they will be fun to
backpatch.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-25 17:38:01 | Re: fsync-pgdata-on-recovery tries to write to more files than previously |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-25 17:28:16 | Re: Run pgindent now? |