Re: RC1 blocker issues

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RC1 blocker issues
Date: 2006-11-24 22:05:03
Message-ID: 1164405903.3841.716.camel@silverbirch.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 12:37 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:48:22PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I wrote:
> > > * possible rearrangement of pg_stat column order:
> > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-11/msg00643.php
> > > Should we do this, and if so should we force initdb (via a
> > > catversion change)? I'm currently leaning to the thought that if
> > > we change it we should force initdb, else we'll risk having a
> > > noticeable user-visible difference between different "8.2"
> > > installations.
> >
> > Actually, on looking closer, we *must* force initdb because this
> > changes the expected output for the rules regression test.
> >
> > So, yea or nay? I'm working up the patch right now, but will hold
> > off applying until I hear some comments.
>
> +1 on applying it. Beta testers should understand what "beta" and
> "test" mean. :)

Yes, I would like to rearrange the columns.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-11-24 22:07:07 Re: RC1 blocker issues
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-11-24 21:10:58 Re: Weird behavior in psql with \copy