Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2015-06-24 16:41:48 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: >> I, by now, have come to a different conclusion. I think it's time to >> entirely drop the renegotiation support.
> I think by now we essentially concluded that we should do that. What I'm > not sure yet is how: Do we want to rip it out in master and just change > the default in the backbranches, or do we want to rip it out in all > branches and leave a faux guc in place in the back branches. I vote for > the latter, but would be ok with both variants. I think the former is probably the saner answer. It is less likely to annoy people who dislike back-branch changes. And it will be significantly less work, considering that that code has changed enough that you won't be able to just cherry-pick a removal patch. I also fear there's a nonzero chance of breaking stuff if you're careless about doing the removal in one or more of the five active back branches ... 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