Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family
Date
Msg-id 11348.1278172073@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: reassign owned to change the ownership for op class and family
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2010-02/msg00174.php

> I wonder if we should think about back-patching just the syscache.h
> portion of that patch.  It would simplify back-patching, and might
> make life easier for people trying to write extensions that are
> compatible with multiple PG versions, too.

Not sure.  Maybe it will make back-patching a bit easier, but we don't
normally consider back-patching cosmetic changes, which is what this
really is.

I don't buy the suggestion that third-party extensions would be able
to rely on it across versions.  They can't know if they're going to be
compiled against the latest minor release or not.  So it's just a
question of whether it'll improve matters enough for our own
back-patches.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Why is vacuum_defer_cleanup_age PGC_USERSET?