eOn Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:41:55AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:19:51AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> >>> I'm going to revert that commit in HEAD shortly, unless Alvaro pops > >> >>> up and promises a fix PDQ. Or you could do the same. > >> > > >> >> I was thinking of changing master to look like the 9.4 version. > >> > > >> > [ shrug... ] IMO, a quick "git revert" is less work and leaves a cleaner > >> > state for Alvaro to apply whatever final solution he settles on. > >> > But do what you wish. > >> > >> OK, I've just reverted it. > > > > Can I ask about the logic of why this bug fix was backpatched, or is > > that clear to everyone but me. > > What is your question, exactly? There was a fair amount of discussion > of whether and how to back-patch this on pgsql-hackers.
Uh, I didn't see a huge amount of discussion, but I guess it is sufficient: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20150109191551.ga32...@fetter.org#20150109191551.ga32...@fetter.org -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
