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
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 |