Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload
Date: 2005-11-12 18:55:04
Message-ID: 28853.1131821704@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
>> I was hoping to avoid forcing source-code changes, but something like
>> that might be the best solution. Anyone think it's unreasonable?

> Alternativly, you could make it optional for a release (print warning
> that magic block wasn't found). Next release require it.

What's the point of waiting? We'd be forcing people to add it sooner
or later, so why not sooner?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Fuhr 2005-11-12 18:56:00 Re: Cursor estimated row count
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2005-11-12 18:51:40 Re: SIGSEGV taken on 8.1 during dump/reload