Re: pg_upgrade and epoch
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade and epoch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140911224047.GD4081@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade and epoch (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:58:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:24:17AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote: > >> I think the reason nobody's responding is because nobody has anything > >> significant to add. It's a behavior change from not-working to > >> working. Why wouldn't it be backpatched? > > > OK, Greg seems to be passionate about this. Does anyone _object_ to my > > back-patching the epoch preservation fix through 9.3. Tom? > > Not I. This is a data-loss bug fix, no? Why would we not back-patch it? Seems I was thinking of another pg_upgrade feature we decided not to backpatch, though I can't find it now. Backpatched through 9.3. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: