Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Date: 2011-06-20 16:57:29
Message-ID: BANLkTimeEd0xzO1tBC4EGqvs+0i82vrd2g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for opinions ranging from fix-now-and-backpatch thru
>> to ignore and discuss for 9.2.
>
> If it's a pre-existing bug I would think that one option would be to
> put it into the next bug-fix release of each supported major release
> in which it is manifest.  Of course, if it is *safe* to work it into
> 9.1, that'd be great.

I'm currently on the other end of the spectrum: ignore and consider for 9.2.

But that's mostly based on the belief that there isn't going to be a
way of fixing this that isn't far too invasive to back-patch. Should
that turn out to be incorrect, that's a different matter, of course...

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-06-20 16:58:35 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fixed string in German translation that causes segfault.
Previous Message Florian Pflug 2011-06-20 16:49:31 Re: proposal: a validator for configuration files