Re: snapshot too old, configured by time
От | Kevin Grittner |
---|---|
Тема | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CACjxUsO4bZ9798atgtUycaSwc42=LD7_hdPx9EkR1b3rGqq4Dg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: snapshot too old, configured by time (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: snapshot too old, configured by time
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > >> After struggling with back-patching a GIN bug fix, I wish to offer up the >> considered opinion that this was an impressively bad idea. It's inserted >> 450 or so pain points for back-patching, which we will have to deal with >> for the next five years. > I understand the backpatching pain argument, but my opinion was the > contrary of yours even so. The other possibility would be to backpatch the no-op patch which just uses the new syntax without any change in semantics. I'm not arguing for that; just putting it on the table.... -- Kevin Grittner EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: