> On May 15, 2018, at 12:50 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2018-05-15 13:44:58 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> On 2018-Apr-23, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> >>> Now, frankly, this being mostly a debugging tool, I think it would be >>> better to have the output as complete as we can. Otherwise, when >>> debugging some hideous problem we find ourselves patching the tool >>> during an emergency in order to figure out what is going on. For this, >>> I would rather patch the earliest version we conveniently can. We >>> cannot patch pg10 because it's already out there, but not so for pg11. >> >> RMT, I would like your opinion on whether to apply a fix for this >> problem to pg11 or not. > > -0.1. We've lived without this for years, I fail to see why this should > get an exception / has any sort of urgency. We could establish a policy > that we just exclude parts of the source tree from the code freeze, but > we haven't so far.
Per Alvaro’s above comment, if this is something low-risk that could prevent the “emergency patch” scenario later on when we actually need such debugging flags in place, I would be ok with getting this in prior to Beta 1. After Beta 1 I would be more risk adverse and go with Andres’s statement around urgency and wait until the PG12 commit cycle. And of course, we should come up with a policy, too, but I think we could kick that can just a bit farther down the road for roughly 2 more weeks. So +1 if we can commit this prior to Beta 1. -1 if it waits until after. Jonathan
