On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Tatsuo Ishii <is...@postgresql.org> writes: >> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> It seems like we have consensus to change >>> CheckRecoveryConflictDetected() to return >>> ERRCODE_T_R_DEADLOCK_DETECTED in 9.1, but not on whether to also >>> change that in 9.0 (votes: Robert - for, Simon - against) > >> Please note that I'm with you. > > I'm inclined to agree that 9.0 is new enough that changing this > shouldn't be too traumatic. If we leave it till 9.1 there will > probably be more pain not less.
I have done a poor job of summarizing the previous votes. Simon was arguing FOR back-patching, and I was arguing AGAINST it. But if you and Tatsuo-san are both in favor of it, then perhaps we should do it. However, that might require people to write application code which has to be aware of which minor version it's talking to, which is usually something we try hard to avoid. Any opinion on what to do about the one that's returning ERRCODE_ADMIN_SHUTDOWN? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
