Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Kevin Grittner
> <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> The funny thing is that I've been thinking all of these months
> >> about how convenient it is that we defined WAL_DEBUG in debug
> >> builds
> >
> > IMO, --enable-debug should not do anything but include debugging
> > symbols. ?The ability to get a useful stack trace from a production
> > crash, without compromising performance, is just too important by
> > itself to consider conditioning any other behavior on it.
>
> So, should I go revert this change in head and 9.1, or does anyone
> else want to argue for Heikki's position that we should just leave it
> on, on the theory that it's too cheap to matter?
I would just fix it in head.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
