From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: isolationtester: add session name to application name
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 13:57:52 -0500
Message-ID: <861977.1639421872@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211213184834.acltkdc2h4yj5npc@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20211211012052.2blmzcmxnxqawd2z@alap3.anarazel.de>
<YbckiqW5wMykJ6nZ@paquier.xyz>
<20211213184834.acltkdc2h4yj5npc@alap3.anarazel.de>
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2021-12-13 19:46:34 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> +1 for the idea. Maybe it could be backpatched?
> Not entirely trivially - the changes have some dependencies on other changes
> (e.g. b1907d688, more on 741d7f104, but that was backpatched). I guess we
> could backpatch b1907d688 as well, but I'm not sure its worth it?
I think we've more recently had the idea that isolationtester features
should be back-patched to avoid gotchas when back-patching test cases.
For instance, all the isolationtester work I did this past summer was
back-patched. So from that vantage point, back-patching b1907d688
seems fine.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, michael@paquier.xyz
Subject: Re: isolationtester: add session name to application name
In-Reply-To: <861977.1639421872@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox