| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mikael Kjellström <mikael(dot)kjellstrom(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Backporting BackgroundPsql |
| Date: | 2024-06-25 20:57:17 |
| Message-ID: | 1362020.1719349037@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> Before pulling any triggers I think https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/4959/
> should be considered, since Tom found some flaws in the current code around how
> timers and timeouts are used.
That's certainly another issue to consider, but is it really a blocker
for this one?
> However, since Andrew is actively aiming to replace all of this shortly, should
> we wait a see where that lands to avoid having to backport another library
> change?
I would like to see what he comes up with ... but is it likely to
be something we'd risk back-patching?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-06-25 20:59:29 | Re: Should we document how column DEFAULT expressions work? |
| Previous Message | James Coleman | 2024-06-25 20:51:05 | Should we document how column DEFAULT expressions work? |