Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Kevin Grittner > <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: >> That is unfortunate. I guess it points out the value of adding a >> comment to point out why we would want to check these values even >> on a reset to a previously-used value. > > +1 for such a comment. Will do. >>> I assume that you're thinking we'd only fix this in master? >> >> Without this, I don't think it's possible for someone to enforce >> protection of their data through SSI in an ironclad way. So >> there is at least some case to be made to take it back as far as >> 9.1. > > I'm OK with that, but perhaps the only-tangentially-related > changes where you swap the order of certain error messages ought > to be separated out and committed only to master? That stuff > doesn't seem like material for a back-patch. Agreed. I'm not sure we want to change the message text at all in 9.1. Translations and all that. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
