Re: Potential data loss of 2PC files

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
> <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
>>> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Michael Paquier
>>> Do you think that this qualifies as a bug fix for a backpatch? I would think
>>> so, but I would not mind waiting for some dust to be on it before considering
>>> applying that on back-branches. Thoughts from others?
>>
>> I think so, too. As change from rename() to durable_rename() was applied to all releases, maybe we can follow that. In addition, keeping code differences as few as possible would make it easier for committers to apply other bug fixes to all versions.
>
> The patch of HEAD applies cleanly on REL9_6_STABLE,

Actually that's not correct as well as pg_clog has been renamed to
pg_xact. Let's be careful here.
--
Michael