On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 4:41 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> writes: > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:44:45PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote: > >> I just wanted to let you know that TimescaleDB uses > >> pg_isolation_regress and occasionally there are reports from some > >> suffering/puzzled users/developers, e.g. [1]. Not 100% sure if it > >> makes investing the time into backpatching worth it. However if > >> someone could do it, it would be nice. > > > FWIW, I am not really sure that this is important enough to justify a > > back-patch, even it is true that there have been cases in the past > > where extra binaries got added in minor releases. > > Yeah, I think adding a binary in a minor release is a Big Deal to > packagers. I doubt that the case here justifies that.
+1. Given the number of complaints from people lacking it since the binary was first created, I can't see how that's a priority that justifies that. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/