On 12.12.2011 21:53, Rafael Martinez wrote:
> On 12/12/2011 07:55 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On Monday, December 12, 2011 07:48:01 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Andres Freund<andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>>>> On Monday, December 12, 2011 09:29:23 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>>>> Revert the behavior of inet/cidr functions to not unpack the arguments.
>>>>
>>>> Whats the plan to handle this wrt a stable release?
>>>
>>> I was wondering whether we shouldn't revert the original patch
>>> altogether in the back branches. As far as I'd heard, there were
>>> no reports of the previous coding causing real trouble, and this
>>> episode demonstrates that there is a possibility to make things
>>> worse rather than better. I think maybe we'd better treat this
>>> change as something to make in HEAD only.
>>
>> +1
>
> +1
>
> This is a bug that really qualifies for an early 9.1.3.
Fair enough, but that is a different issue from whether the original
patch should be reverted altogether. The memory leak has been fixed now,
in any case.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com