Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2013-03-04 09:40:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> FWIW, I noticed something about a "forced update" when I did a git pull
> >> after Kevin's commits. I failed to pay enough attention though. Now
> >> that I look, the xml fix is not in my local history either, and I don't
> >> know what bc61878682051678ade5f59da7bfd90ab72ce13b is because none of
> >> the recent commits have that hash according to my repo:
>
> > That is/was your map_sql_value_to_xml_value() commit which is now not in
> > the normal history anymore because kevin pushed a HEAD that didn't
> > include it. You should be able to see it with git show
> > bc61878682051678ade5f59da7bfd90ab72ce13b
>
> Ah, right, so it is still there but it's not in the chain leading to
> HEAD. So "forced update" really means "I moved HEAD in a non fast
> forward way"?
Well, to git, "non fast forward" can also mean create a merge commit of
two heads, which isn't very problematic. A forced update might mean
(such as in this case) that one or more commits are left completely
disconnected from history -- that's much worse.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
