From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_stat_statements vs escape_string_warning |
Date: | 2015-01-21 18:37:35 |
Message-ID: | 26329.1421865455@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> This isn't a back-patchable bug fix, but given the lack of prior
>> complaints, maybe it doesn't matter. Alternatively, we could back-patch
>> only the addition of escape_string_warning to the struct: that would fit
>> into padding space in the struct so that there would be no ABI risk.
> I think that this is a good idea, but I see very little reason to
> back-patch. I'm not aware that the "padding space" argument has been
> used for something like this before.
Oh, we definitely *have* done that kind of thing in the past, when there
was sufficient motivation. But I'm not sure there's sufficient motivation
here.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-01-21 19:30:41 | Windows buildfarm animals are still not happy with abbreviated keys patch |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-01-21 18:28:12 | Re: pg_stat_statements vs escape_string_warning |