Re: Fix doc bug in logical replication.

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>
Cc: Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fix doc bug in logical replication.
Date: 2019-07-08 12:56:37
Message-ID: 8a38b8ef-c94b-48e4-6c10-3542d737310e@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-06-27 18:50, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Whether we *want* to document that it works, documenting that it
>> doesn't work when it does can't be the right answer. If you want to
>> couch the language to leave the door open that we may not support this
>> the same way in the future I wouldn't be opposed to that, but at this
>> point we will have three releases with the current behavior in
>> production, so if we decide to change the behavior, it is likely going
>> to break certain use cases. That may be ok, but I'd expect a
>> documentation update to accompany a change that would cause such a
>> breaking change.
>>
> I agree with that. We have this behavior for quite a bit of time, and
> while technically we could change the behavior in the future (using the
> "not supported" statement), IMO that'd be pretty annoying move. I always
> despised systems that "fix" bugs by documenting that it does not work, and
> this is a bit similar.

committed back to PG10

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Julien Rouhaud 2019-07-08 13:15:18 Re: Excessive memory usage in multi-statement queries w/ partitioning
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2019-07-08 12:17:41 Re: [PATCH] Speedup truncates of relation forks