On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Gurjeet Singh <gurj...@singh.im> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Kevin Grittner <kgri...@ymail.com> wrote: >> Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> >>> If we're going to do it like this, then I think the force flag >>> should be considered to do nothing except override the clock >>> check, which probably means it shouldn't be tested in the initial >>> if() at all. >> >> That makes sense, and is easily done. > > Attached is the patch to save you a few key strokes :) > >> The only question left is >> how far back to take the patch. I'm inclined to only apply it to >> master and 9.4. Does anyone think otherwise? > > Considering this as a bug-fix, I'd vote for it to be applied to all > supported releases. But since this may cause unforeseen performance > penalty, I think it should be applied only as far back as the > introduction of PGSTAT_STAT_INTERVAL throttle. > > The throttle was implemeted in 641912b, which AFAICT was part of 8.3. > So I guess all the supported releases it is.
I'll vote for master-only. I view this as a behavior change, and it isn't nice to spring those on people in minor releases. -- 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
