On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On February 19, 2016 2:42:08 PM GMT+01:00, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > wrote: >>> I think we should fix it, but not backpatch. >> >>I don't think that's particularly good policy. It's a clear bug, why >>would we not fix it? Leaving it as-is in the back branches can have >>no good effect, and what it does do is create a merge hazard for other >>back-patchable bug fixes in the same area. > > Agreed.
+1. I think this is clearly a back-patchable fix. -- 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
