On 1/25/24 17:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> writes:
>> Another thing to note here -- knowing the LSN is important but also
>> knowing that backup recovery was attempted (i.e. backup_label exists) is
>> really crucial. Knowing both just saves so much time in back and forth
>> debugging.
>
>> It appears the tally for back patching is:
>
>> For: Andres, David, Michael B
>> Not Sure: Robert, Laurenz, Michael P
>
>> It seems at least nobody is dead set against it.
>
> We're talking about 1d35f705e, right? That certainly looks harmless
> and potentially useful. I'm +1 for back-patching.
That's the one. If we were modifying existing messages I would be
against it, but new, infrequent (but oh so helpful) messages seem fine.
Regards,
-David
