Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Oh, you mean move load_hba *down*, past the syslogger startup?
>> Yeah, that would probably be all right.
> Well, that's what I originally said, yes ;-)
> But I don't think that precludes your more general suggestion regarding
> startup errors. In particular, I think moving the hba load down would be
> reasonable to backpatch to 8.4, whereas I doubt the general fix would.
Well, the change I had in mind is only a few lines of code, and is
fixing a behavior that you yourself are arguing is unusably broken.
It seems like a reasonable back-patch candidate to me if we think this
is a serious bug. But I personally wasn't seeing any of this as due for
back-patching. The -S behavior has been like it is since forever, and
nobody's complained before.
regards, tom lane
