Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Shruthi Gowda <gowdashru(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Date: 2022-07-26 19:45:11
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYXMGtEXgX06acfLG2X3qXFf2n4btvN7pF0QLXSQF2T9Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 2:57 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Well, it took a while to figure out how to make that work, but I
> believe I've got it now. Attached please find a couple of patches that
> should get the job done. They might need a bit of polish, but I think
> the basic concepts are sound.

So, would people like these patches (1) committed to master only, (2)
committed to master and back-patched into v15, or (3) not committed at
all? Michael argued upthread that it was too risky to be tinkering
with things at this stage in the release cycle and, certainly, the
more time goes by, the more true that gets. But I'm not convinced that
these patches involve an inordinate degree of risk, and using beta as
a time to fix things that turned out to be buggy is part of the point
of the whole thing. On the other hand, the underlying issue isn't that
serious either, and nobody seems to have reviewed the patches in
detail, either. I don't mind committing them on my own recognizance if
that's what people would prefer; I can take responsibility for fixing
anything that is further broken, as I suppose would be expected even
if someone else did review. But, I don't want to do something that
other people feel is the wrong thing to have done.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-07-26 19:47:18 Re: Postgres do not allow to create many tables with more than 63-symbols prefix
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2022-07-26 19:26:59 [Commitfest 2022-07] Patch Triage: Waiting on Author