| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work |
| Date: | 2015-09-23 19:00:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20150923190030.GL1573@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-09-23 15:57:02 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think we need to make a decision here. Is this a terribly serious
> bug/misdesign that needs addressing?
Imo yes. Not sure about terribly, but definitely serious. It's several
data loss bugs in one package.
> If so, we need to backpatch. If not, then by all means lets leave it
> alone. I don't think it is a good idea to leave it open if we think
> it's serious, which is what I think is happening.
Right, but I don't want to backpatch this over an objection, and it
doesn't seem like I have a chance to convince Robert that it'd be a good
idea. So it'll be 9.5+master for now.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-09-23 19:07:10 | Re: unclear about row-level security USING vs. CHECK |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-09-23 18:57:02 | Re: Rework the way multixact truncations work |