From: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point) |
Date: | 2008-03-28 04:17:18 |
Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.64.0803272337330.17248@westnet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
>> This project doesn't make functional changes to stable releases, that's
>> the reason why 8.2 will never get patched to add the %r feature.
> I completely understand that, but still was hoping that we'd change that.
Well, then you really don't understand this at all then, so let's work on
that for a bit. http://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning is the
official statement, perhaps some examples will help clarify where and why
the line is where it is.
One of the first patches I ever submitted made a minor change to a contrib
utility used solely for benchmarking (pgbench) that added a useful
feature, only if you passed it the right parameter. That was considered
for a tiny bit before being rejected as a feature change too large to put
into a stable branch.
That was a small change in a utility that should never be run on a
production system. You're trying to get a change made to the code path
people rely on for their *backups*. Good luck with that.
The parable I enjoy pulling out in support of this policy is MySQL bug
#31001:
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/10/04/mysql-quality-of-old-and-new-features/
where they added a seemingly minor optimization to something and
accidentally broke the ability to sort in some cases. There's always a
small risk that comes with any code change, and this is why you don't ever
touch working production code unless you're fixing a bug that's more
troublesome than that risk.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-03-28 04:54:09 | Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-03-28 03:30:07 | Re: proposal for 8.4: PL/pgSQL - statement CASE |