Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE
Date: 2018-11-06 05:15:51
Message-ID: 20181106051551.GG1814@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 05:29:36PM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Thanks. Pushed to master only.

Just a wild idea while this thread is hot: could we add in the
description of the broken APIs or in their headers more information
about how to not use them so as users are warned if trying to use them
in certain circumstances? This idea is just for the stable branches.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2018-11-06 05:45:02 Re: Strange failure in LWLock on skink in REL9_5_STABLE
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-11-06 05:12:53 Re: pg_promote not marked as parallel-restricted in pg_proc.dat