| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures |
| Date: | 2008-08-18 03:44:44 |
| Message-ID: | 48A8F02C.8090208@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 09:40:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> "Asko Oja" <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>
>>> Is it possible to get it into some official 8.3.x release
>>>
>> This is not the kind of patch we put into stable branches.
>>
>
> Does this really count as a user-visible change, except in the sense
> that they won't see things erroring out? It doesn't add new syntax,
> as far as I can tell.
>
>
So what? That is not the only criterion for backpatching.
The bigger the change the more resistance there will be to backpatching
it. Code stability is a major concern.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | leiyonghua | 2008-08-18 04:22:57 | Re: about postgres-r setup. |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-08-18 03:23:07 | Re: Overhauling GUCS |