On 09/26/2017 06:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 09/26/2017 05:45 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> I've not been following along very closely- are we sure that ripping >> this out won't be worse than dealing with it in-place? Will pulling it >> out also require a post-RC1 catversion bump? >> >> > > It shouldn't do AFAIK - the function signatures weren't changed. >
At this stage on reflection I agree it should be pulled :-( I'm not happy about the idea of marking an input function as not parallel safe, certainly not without a good deal of thought and discussion that we don't have time for this cycle. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
