Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?

At Thu, 29 Nov 2018 15:03:00 -0800, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote in
<20181129230300.vkj3csjwk7jt2cfv@alap3.anarazel.de>
> Hi,
> 
> On 2018-11-29 16:23:42 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Generally, I think Andres is wrong to argue that immutability
> > shouldn't mean *anything* across major versions.  If we can readily
> > foresee that something is going to change in the future, then we
> > shouldn't mark it immutable. However:
> 
> I was too glib/brief. All I meant is that we shouldn't take immutable to
> *guarantee* anything across major versions. We, of course, shouldn't
> break things willy-nilly, and consider the consequences of such
> potential breaking changes. Including having to reindex. It's not like
> that's only the case for changing immutable functions, the index storage
> itself etc also matter.

FWIW, I agree to this.

# And returning to the topic, I vote for pg_config should be "stable".

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center