On 2014-05-14 14:55:38 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 05/13/2014 05:13 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >That leaves the spgist thing and some infrastructure till we can setup a > >valgrind animal... From what we've caught with it so far that seems > >rather worthwile. > >What's your plans with your spgist fix? Commit it once 9.5 is branched? > > Good question. I don't know. I would still like to commit it to 9.4. It > doesn't require catalog changes, but it's an incompatible change in the WAL > record format. If we commit it to 9.4, it means that you cannot replicate > between 9.4beta1 and 9.4beta2. I think that's OK, but how do others feel > about that?
I personally think that's not too bad. Alternatively we could come up with a second way that's not breaking the WAL format. I'd feel better if we had a back patchable fix... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
