Re: Adding missing object access hook invocations
От | Mark Dilger |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Adding missing object access hook invocations |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 330CE9A8-47A4-4C6C-8435-E6A86F3D2E6B@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Adding missing object access hook invocations (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Adding missing object access hook invocations
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Mar 17, 2020, at 11:49 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2020-03-16 16:03:51 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote: >> While working on object access hooks, I noticed several locations >> where I would expect the hook to be invoked, but no actual invocation. >> I think this just barely qualifies as a bug. It's debatable because >> whether it is a bug depends on the user's expectations and whether not >> invoking the hook in these cases is defensible. Does anybody have any >> recollection of an intentional choice not to invoke in these >> locations? > > I am strongly against treating this as a bug, which'd likely imply > backpatching. New hook invocations are a noticable behavioural change, > and very plausibly will break currently working extensions. That's fine > for a major version upgrade, but not for a minor one, unless there are > very good reasons. I agree that this does not need to be back-patched. I was debating whether it constitutes a bug for the purpose of puttingthe fix into v13 vs. punting the patch forward to the v14 cycle. I don't have a strong opinion on that. Thoughts? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: