Tom Lane wrote:
> Should we consider this HEAD-only, or a back-patchable bug fix?
> Or perhaps compromise on HEAD + 9.5?
It looks like a bug to me, but I think it might destabilize approved
execution plans(*), so it may not be such a great idea to back patch
branches that are already released. I think HEAD + 9.5 is good.
(*) I hear there are even applications where queries and their approved
execution plans are kept in a manifest, and plans that deviate from that
raise all kinds of alarms. I have never seen such a thing ...
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
