On April 16, 2016 6:02:39 PM PDT, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >I wrote: >> So at this point I'm not sure what to do. I could back out the >back-patch >> of 44cd47c1d49655c5, which would mean accepting that 9.2/9.3 are >broken >> and will never be fixed for HPPA, as well as any other architectures >that >> use the same fallback memory barrier implementation. The lack of >> complaints from the field suggests that nobody would care. Or I >could >> push forward by back-patching daa7527afc227443 (and a couple of minor >> follow-on cleanups). That doesn't seem particularly risky, now that >> 9.4's been out for awhile, but it's kind of a large back-patch to >benefit >> architectures that apparently no actual users care about. > >I went ahead and prepared and tested such a patch; the version for 9.3 >is attached. (9.2 is identical modulo some pgindent-induced whitespace >difference.) This doesn't look too hazardous to me, so I'm thinking >we should apply it.
I can't look at the patch just now, but the plan sounds good. Of you rather have somebody look art the patch before, I can do tomorrow morning. Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
