Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote:
> I'm strongly leaning toward the idea that a slightly tweaked
> version of the proposed patch is appropriate for the back-branches,
> because the fix Heikki is now suggesting seems too invasive to
> back-patch. I think it would make sense to apply it to master,
> too, so that the new isolation tests can be immediately added. We
> can then work on the new approach for 9.4 and have the tests to
> help confirm we are not breaking anything. The tweak would be to
> preserve the signature of heap_freeze_tuple(), because after the
> more invasive fix in 9.4 the new parameters will not be needed.
> They are only passed as non-NULL from one of the three callers, so
> it seems best to leave those call sites alone rather than change
> them back-and-forth.
>
> I will post a new patch today or tomorrow.
Attached.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
