On 09/26/2017 06:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/26/2017 05:45 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I've not been following along very closely- are we sure that ripping
>> this out won't be worse than dealing with it in-place? Will pulling it
>> out also require a post-RC1 catversion bump?
>>
>>
>
> It shouldn't do AFAIK - the function signatures weren't changed.
>
At this stage on reflection I agree it should be pulled :-(
I'm not happy about the idea of marking an input function as not
parallel safe, certainly not without a good deal of thought and
discussion that we don't have time for this cycle.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
