Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote:
>> Agreed. We now have $OLD_SUBJECT, but this is a win independently. I have
>> reviewed the code that runs between the old and new call sites, and I did not
>> identify a hazard of moving it as you describe.
> I looked at this when we last discussed it and didn't see a problem
> either, so I tend to agree that we ought to go ahead and do this,
+1, as long as you mean in 9.3 not 9.2. I don't see any risk either,
but the time for taking new risks in 9.2 is past.
Noah, please add this patch to the upcoming CF, if you didn't already.
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
