From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Christophe Pettus <christophe(dot)pettus(at)pgexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? |
Date: | 2017-09-26 22:18:53 |
Message-ID: | 32160eb9-60df-746b-bbc0-dd232b993d6d@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On 09/26/2017 06:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/26/2017 05:45 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I've not been following along very closely- are we sure that ripping
>> this out won't be worse than dealing with it in-place? Will pulling it
>> out also require a post-RC1 catversion bump?
>>
>>
>
> It shouldn't do AFAIK - the function signatures weren't changed.
>
At this stage on reflection I agree it should be pulled :-(
I'm not happy about the idea of marking an input function as not
parallel safe, certainly not without a good deal of thought and
discussion that we don't have time for this cycle.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-26 22:49:39 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2017-09-26 22:04:26 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Euler Taveira | 2017-09-26 22:25:25 | Re: Logical Replication - test_decoding - unchanged-toast-datum |
Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2017-09-26 22:15:39 | Re: v10 pg_ctl compatibility |