Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and comments to say bytes not kilobytes.
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and comments to say bytes not kilobytes. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikPjwY-y5NbdvL3hniNSlwwX_DJ44gXq4Yf5_H4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and comments to say bytes not kilobytes. (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix log_temp_files docs and
comments to say bytes not kilobytes.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Changing the unit setting would also be a behavioral change. I think >>> what Bruce is suggesting is that this is simply not worth worrying about >>> in the back branches. > >> It seems pretty strange not to at least document it. And I'm not wild >> about adding documentation that says "Even though this value purports >> to be in kilobytes, it's really not", but I guess we can. > > Uh, no, the suggestion is to do *nothing* in the back branches. Yes > they're buggy, but without any field complaints, it's hard to argue that > anyone much cares. And I agree with Greg Smith that for anyone who does > care, a behavioral change in a minor release is much harder to deal with > than a change at a major release. OK, so I talked to Bruce about this and I guess I've been persuaded that we should just apply the patch I sent upthread to HEAD and leave the back-branches broken, for fear of creating an incompatibility. I'll go do that unless someone wants to argue further... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: