Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 28, 2025 at 9:45 PM Richard Guo <[email protected]> wrote: >> Back-patch to v18. Although this issue exists before that, changes in >> this version made it common enough to notice. Given the lack of field >> reports for older versions, I am not back-patching further.
> Generally we don't back-patch fixes that could change plans, because > it tends to produce user complaints. It's maybe more justifiable in > this case because v18 is quite new and you didn't back-patch to older > releases, but are we sure that it's warranted even there? It's a regression if we don't. See nearby complaint at https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/b75866aa-bb54-456b-8f88-6b5bc52064ca%40app.fastmail.com That case was correctly handled in v17 and before. regards, tom lane
