On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> 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.
I agree with Tom. -- 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
