Re: Wrong defeinition of pq_putmessage_noblock since 9.5 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Wrong defeinition of pq_putmessage_noblock since 9.5
Date
Msg-id 29430.1469811650@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Wrong defeinition of pq_putmessage_noblock since 9.5  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Wrong defeinition of pq_putmessage_noblock since 9.5  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes:
>> Any work in this area is likely 10.0 material at this point.

> I'm not really happy with that, since refactoring it again will create
> back-patch hazards.  But I see that a lot of the mess here was created
> in 9.5, which means we're probably stuck with back-patch hazards anyway.

I've pushed Kyotaro-san's original patch, which is clearly a bug fix.
I think the additional changes discussed later in this thread are
cosmetic, and probably should wait for a more general review of the
layering decisions in pqcomm.c.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [sqlsmith] Failed assertion in joinrels.c
Next
From: Nikolay Samokhvalov
Date:
Subject: Re: "Strong sides of MySQL" talk from PgDay16Russia, translated