| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Date: | 2017-02-06 03:34:34 |
| Message-ID: | 4663.1486352074@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> +1. I don't think we serve our users by putting out a nontrivial bugfix
>> hastily. Nor do I think we serve them in this instance by delaying the
>> release to cover this fix; there's enough other fixes in the release
>> imo.
> I'm bit a surprised with this position.
The point is that there's a nontrivial chance of a hasty fix introducing
worse problems than we fix.
Given the lack of consensus about exactly how to fix this, I'm feeling
like it's a good idea if whatever we come up with gets some time to age
awhile in git before we ship it.
Obviously, 2ndQ or EDB or any other distributor can choose to ship a patch
in their own builds if they're sufficiently comfortable with the particular
patch. That doesn't translate to there having to be a fix in the
community's wraps this week.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-02-06 03:47:24 | Re: Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-02-06 03:18:58 | Re: Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY |