Re: archive modules

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Benoit Lobréau <benoit(dot)lobreau(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: archive modules
Date: 2022-11-15 17:14:25
Message-ID: 20221115171425.afwbze753mex4ndj@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2022-Nov-15, Nathan Bossart wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 10:31:44AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> > The surrounding code has changed a bit between PG15 and master, so if we
> > wanted to backpatch this, we'd need another patch from you. However, at
> > this point, I'm content to just leave it be in PG15.
>
> Sounds good to me.

Hmm, really? It seems to me that we will have two slightly different
behaviors in 15 and master, which may be confusing later on. I think
it'd be better to make them both work identically.

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Industry suffers from the managerial dogma that for the sake of stability
and continuity, the company should be independent of the competence of
individual employees." (E. Dijkstra)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-11-15 17:24:46 Re: when the startup process doesn't (logging startup delays)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2022-11-15 17:07:06 Re: allowing for control over SET ROLE