On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> 2014-12-12 14:58 GMT+01:00 Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>:
>> Now, what do we do with the back-branches? I'm not sure. Changing the
>> behaviour in back-branches could cause nasty surprises. Perhaps it's best to
>> just leave it as it is, even though it's buggy.
>>
>
> As long as master is fixed, I don't actually care. But I agree with Dennis
> that it's hard to see what's been commited with all the different issues
> found, and if any commits were done, in which branch. I'd like to be able to
> tell my customers: update to this minor release to see if it's fixed, but I
> can't even do that.
This bug does not endanger at all data consistency as only old WAL
files remain on the standby, so I'm fine as well with just a clean fix
on master, and nothing done on back-branches.
--
Michael