On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:58:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:24:17AM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> >> I think the reason nobody's responding is because nobody has anything
> >> significant to add. It's a behavior change from not-working to
> >> working. Why wouldn't it be backpatched?
> > OK, Greg seems to be passionate about this. Does anyone _object_ to my
> > back-patching the epoch preservation fix through 9.3. Tom?
> Not I. This is a data-loss bug fix, no? Why would we not back-patch it?
Seems I was thinking of another pg_upgrade feature we decided not to
backpatch, though I can't find it now.
Backpatched through 9.3.
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
+ Everyone has their own god. +
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com)
To make changes to your subscription: