From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 9.2 final |
Date: | 2012-06-12 22:13:13 |
Message-ID: | 24902.1339539193@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> I'm working on getting all of our triggers to behave with Tom's v8
>> patch for bug 6123 and hope to be able to post a positive result
>> tomorrow. I think this is considered a bug and still subject to
>> inclusion, but it doesn't really cause my shop any pain if it is
>> bumped to 9.3. In other words, I don't think this is a blocker.
> Testing has run into problems, the cause of which is not immediately
> obvious. I think we should bump this to 9.3. Our shop has a
> workaround which isn't drawing any complaints here, and the issue
> has been around forever in its current form. I'm not even sure we
> won't need more discussion on what constitutes correct behavior once
> I track things down.
Agreed. Even if we were entirely happy with the design of the patch
(which, from the previous discussion, we weren't 100%) and your testing
gave it a clean bill of health, it's uncomfortable to be pushing such a
change into 9.2 post-beta --- it might invalidate other peoples'
application compatibility checking, which I'm sure people have started
doing using the betas. Punting to 9.3 seems like the thing to do.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-06-12 22:26:25 | Re: 9.3: load path to mitigate load penalty for checksums |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-06-12 22:03:37 | Re: 9.3: load path to mitigate load penalty for checksums |