Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2016-01-03 15:40:01 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: >> I'm happy with this being a simple patch now, not least because I would >> like to backpatch this to 9.4 where catalog scans became MVCC. >> >> A backpatch is warranted because it is a severe performance issue with >> replication and we can fix that before 9.5 hits the streets. >> >> I'll be doing some more testing and checking, so not in a rush.
> This seems like a might subtle thing to backpatch. If we really want to > go there, ISTM that the relevant code should stew in an unreleased > branch for a while, before being backpatched. I'm definitely -1 on back-patching such a thing. Put it in HEAD for awhile. If it survives six months or so then we could discuss it again. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers