From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg12 release notes
Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 10:18:23 -0400
Message-ID: <22340.1557497903@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190510135904.GA32055@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20190510135904.GA32055@alvherre.pgsql>
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Still, it's an inconsistency in pg11. I vote -0 to getting it
> backpatched, mostly because it seems like more work than is warranted.
> (I think the work consists not only of testing that the backpatched
> commit works correctly, but also documenting for 11.4 release notes how
> to fix existing catalogs after upgrading.)
Yeah, I agree. Even if we back-patched a code change, nothing could
rely on relhassubclass for this purpose in a v11 database, because
of not knowing whether the user actually bothered to manually update
pre-existing indexes' entries. Better to know that it doesn't work
than to be unsure if it does.
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, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp, david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com, bruce@momjian.us, pryzby@telsasoft.com
Subject: Re: pg12 release notes
In-Reply-To: <22340.1557497903@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