Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de
Cc: robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, 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 13:36:56
Message-ID: 68922a89-90bd-1906-562d-534d429bef80@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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?

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2018-11-30 13:43:25 Re: COPY FROM WHEN condition
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-11-30 13:23:50 Re: New GUC to sample log queries