* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Thanks. Shouldn't this fix be back-patched? pg_visibility should fail
> properly for indexes and other relkinds even in 9.6. pgstattuple can
> also trigger failures. It would be confusing for users to face "could
> not open file" kind of errors instead of a proper error message. Note
> that I am fine to produce those patches if there is a resource issue
> for any of you two.

I'm not really convinced that back-patching this is worthwhile, which is
why I didn't go through the effort to do so.  A reasonable error will be
thrown in either case, after all, without any bad behavior happening,
from what I can see.

That said, if you feel strongly enough about it to propose appropriate
patches for the back-branches, I'll try and look at them before the next
set of point releases, but I'm not going to deal with them this month as
I'd like to get through as much of the CF for PG10 as we can.

> +-- an actual index of a partitiond table should work though
> Typo here => s/partitiond/partitioned/

Will fix.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to