| From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2017-02-05 18:09:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAFj8pRDy9tcerqEwM8gOtDV9z-E5zT3Xe9mi2WZ1HLmAX643Uw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2017-02-05 18:51 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> I agree with Pavan - a release with known important bug is not good
> idea.
>
> > This bug has been around for some time, so I would recommend taking
> > the time necessary to make the best fix possible, even if it means
> > waiting for the next round of minor releases.
>
> I think the way to think about this sort of thing is, if we had found
> this bug when a release wasn't imminent, would we consider it bad enough
> to justify an unscheduled release cycle? I have to think the answer for
> this one is "probably not".
>
There are a questions
1. is it critical bug?
2. if is it, will be reason for special minor release?
3. how much time is necessary for fixing of this bug?
These questions can be unimportant if there is some security fixes in next
release, what I cannot to know.
Regards
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martín Marqués | 2017-02-05 18:34:58 | Re: Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-02-05 18:04:20 | Re: Draft release notes for next week's releases are up for review |