On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié ago 04 12:37:23 -0400 2010: >> My recollection is that that change was associated with some pretty >> significant revisions to the postmaster state machine. I'm concerned >> about the risks involved in back-patching that. This seems to be a >> corner case with pretty minimal consequences anyway, so I'm inclined >> to leave 8.2 alone. > > IIRC this is the kind of thing that "dead-end backends" were invented > for. It was too a large patch for backpatching, IMHO.
Though I thought about this issue for a while, I end up agreeing that the back-patching has a risk. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
