On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > >> I'm looking for opinions ranging from fix-now-and-backpatch thru >> to ignore and discuss for 9.2. > > If it's a pre-existing bug I would think that one option would be to > put it into the next bug-fix release of each supported major release > in which it is manifest. Of course, if it is *safe* to work it into > 9.1, that'd be great.
I'm currently on the other end of the spectrum: ignore and consider for 9.2. But that's mostly based on the belief that there isn't going to be a way of fixing this that isn't far too invasive to back-patch. Should that turn out to be incorrect, that's a different matter, of course... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
