On 3/6/19 12:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 5:35 PM Andrew Dunstan
> <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> OK, I think we have agreement on Tom's patch. Do we want to backpatch
>> it? It's a change in behaviour, but I find it hard to believe anyone
>> relies on the existence of these annoying messages, so my vote would be
>> to backpatch it.
> I don't think it's a bug fix, so I don't think it should be
> back-patched. I think trying to guess which behavior changes are
> likely to bother users is an unwise strategy -- it's very hard to know
> what will actually bother people, and it's very easy to let one's own
> desire to get a fix out the door lead to an unduly rosy view of the
> situation. Plus, all patches carry some risk, because all developers
> make mistakes; the fewer things we back-patch, the fewer regressions
> we'll introduce.
>
OK, no back-patching it is.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
