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)
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 |