| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Git migration timeline |
| Date: | 2010-08-16 18:50:35 |
| Message-ID: | 19360.1281984635@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Nobody responded when I asked about this recently, but shouldn't
> that list include "BUG #5607: memmory leak in ecpg"? We have a
> patch from Zoltn Bszrmnyi from before this bug report which
> seems to address the issue and which Michael Meskes said "Feel free
> to apply".
> We don't want to ship 9.0 with known memory leaks, do we?
Better a memory leak than broken ecpg ;-). Nobody except Michael
is terribly comfortable with that code, so we'd all rather wait for
him to review and apply the patch.
More generally, pre-existing bugs have never been considered release
stoppers. At this point what we would block the release for is *new*
bugs in 9.0. (An exception to that general rule is pre-existing bugs
that would require an initdb to fix; but this one isn't that either.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-16 19:00:43 | 9.0 open issues (was Re: Git migration timeline) |
| Previous Message | Dmitriy Igrishin | 2010-08-16 18:50:08 | Re: Conflicted names of error conditions. |