On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 10:41 AM Andrey Borodin <x4...@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > Does anyone maintain opensource pg_surgery analogs for released versions of > PG? > It seems to me I'll have to use something like this and I just though that I > should consider pg_surgery in favour of our pg_dirty_hands.
I do not. I'm still of the opinion that we ought to back-patch pg_surgery. This didn't attract a consensus before, and it's hard to dispute that it's a new feature in what would be a back branch. But it's unclear to me how users are otherwise supposed to recover from some of the bugs that are or have been present in those back branches. I'm not sure that I see the logic in telling people we'll try to prevent them from getting hosed in the future but if they're already hosed they can wait for v14 to fix it. They can't wait that long, and a dump-and-restore cycle is awfully painful. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
