Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?
Date: 2018-11-30 15:15:07
Message-ID: 20181130151507.GX3415@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greetings,

* Joe Conway (mail(at)joeconway(dot)com) wrote:
> On 11/30/18 3:30 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> > # And returning to the topic, I vote for pg_config should be "stable".
>
> And on that note, Does this change does warrant backpatching, or should
> be applied to master only?

Given that it's a catalog change, I would think just master..

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Dolgov 2018-11-30 15:15:37 Re: Flexible permissions for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW
Previous Message Dmitry Dolgov 2018-11-30 15:13:13 Re: Undo worker and transaction rollback