From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Commit/abort WAL records with dropped rels missing XLR_SPECIAL_REL_UPDATE |
Date: | 2020-08-17 07:55:13 |
Message-ID: | 31bfe3aa-4962-955d-2f40-94de8b3e659a@iki.fi |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 17/08/2020 10:00, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 11:05:43AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 2:17 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
>>> It's always been like that, but I am not going backport, for fear of
>>> breaking existing applications. If a program reads the WAL, and would
>>> actually need to do something with commit records dropping relations,
>>> that seems like such a common scenario that the author should've thought
>>> about it and handled it even without the flag reminding about it. Fixing
>>> it in master ought to be enough.
>>
>> +1 for doing it in master only. Even if someone comes up with such a
>> scenario for back-branches, we can revisit our decision to backport
>> this but like you, I also don't see any pressing need to do it now.
>
> +1.
Pushed, thanks!
- Heikki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Esteban Zimanyi | 2020-08-17 08:14:34 | Making the function range_union_internal available to other extensions |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2020-08-17 07:14:38 | Re: Newline after --progress report |