Christoph Berg wrote: > Re: Tom Lane 2017-05-31 <28752.1496238...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> > Next question: should we back-patch this change, or just do it in HEAD? > > Debian "needs" it for 9.6, but I've already pushed the s390x patch in > the original posting, so I could just live with it being just in head. > But of course it would be nice to have everything in sync. I think it's only a problem for you in 9.6-only because you've not tried pglogical or some other large-shlib extension with earlier branches; in other words, eventually this is going to bite somebody using the old branches as well, unless we believe that the platforms are dead enough that nobody really cares other than for academic purposes. My vote would be to backpatch it all the way. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
