| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, qiuwenhuifx(at)gmail(dot)com, shinya11(dot)kato(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: enhance wraparound warnings |
| Date: | 2026-08-04 08:41:10 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwH1yf4EtV7ydFpf-7rnuaN+E2NL6r=Wp0Hudkvfz4qS4A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 4, 2026 at 4:50 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I looked at both patches and they look good to me. pgindent is happy too.
Thanks for the review!
> Just a quick question: is the documentation change considered
> backpatchable when the source commit exists in older versions? I mean,
> does it fall into the bug or inconsistency category that qualifies for
> backpatching?
Yes, I think 0002 is backpatchable. The issue is minor, but the documentation
example is clearly inconsistent with the actual runtime message in branches
where the source commit was backpatched. So I see this as a documentation
bug fix rather than a cosmetic wording change.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nisha Moond | 2026-08-04 08:41:13 | Re: Support EXCEPT for TABLES IN SCHEMA publications |
| Previous Message | Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) | 2026-08-04 08:39:18 | RE: [PATCH] Release replication slot on error in SQL-callable slot functions |