Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> We're not so worried about this case that we'd want to backport the
>> deadman switch into 8.3 or 8.2 to have a fix there, are we?
> I think we should consider backporting the deadman switch to 8.3 and 8.2.
[ raised eyebrow... ] Weren't you the one just lecturing me about
minimizing changes in back branches?
That was a fairly large patch, and I *don't* want to back-port it.
The thrust of my question was more along the lines of whether we should
look for a different solution to the current problem, so that we would
have something that could be back-ported into 8.2 and 8.3. Personally
I'm satisfied with only fixing it in 8.4 and up, but then again I don't
use Windows.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
