Re: Re: Proposed Windows-specific change: Enable crash dumps (like core files)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Proposed Windows-specific change: Enable crash dumps (like core files) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29474.1290447020@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Proposed Windows-specific change: Enable crash dumps (like core files) (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Proposed Windows-specific change: Enable crash
dumps (like core files)
Re: Re: Proposed Windows-specific change: Enable crash dumps (like core files) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > I don't see why an upgrading aid would be worthy of back-patching, but > not a debugging aid. I'd certainly prioritize those in the other > order. I think the sort of upgrading aid Peter has in mind is the kind where it's entirely useless if it's not back-patched, because it has to run in the pre-upgraded server. We've discussed such things before in the context of in-place upgrade, though I believe there have been no actual instances as yet. I'm not really sure why we're even considering the notion of back-patching this item. Doing so would not fit with any past practice or agreed-on project management practices, not even under our lax standards for contrib (and I keep hearing people claim that contrib is or should be as trustworthy as core, anyway). Since when do we back-patch significant features that have not been through a beta test cycle? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: