Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Asko Tiidumaa <asko(dot)tiidumaa(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family
Date: 2010-07-03 15:47:53
Message-ID: 11348.1278172073@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-02/msg00174.php

> I wonder if we should think about back-patching just the syscache.h
> portion of that patch. It would simplify back-patching, and might
> make life easier for people trying to write extensions that are
> compatible with multiple PG versions, too.

Not sure. Maybe it will make back-patching a bit easier, but we don't
normally consider back-patching cosmetic changes, which is what this
really is.

I don't buy the suggestion that third-party extensions would be able
to rely on it across versions. They can't know if they're going to be
compiled against the latest minor release or not. So it's just a
question of whether it'll improve matters enough for our own
back-patches.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message subham 2010-07-03 17:04:33 Needs Suggestion
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-07-03 15:32:09 Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay