Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures
Date
Msg-id B9E2A00D-D119-4A3E-AD58-EA037F8F3574@hi-media.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Le 19 août 08 à 20:47, Tom Lane a écrit :
> I'm not sure that I *want* a formal written-down backpatch policy.
> Whether (and how far) to backpatch has always been a best-judgment
> call
> in the past, and we've gotten along fine with that.  I think having a
> formal policy is just likely to lead to even more complaints: either
> patching or not patching could result in second-guessing by someone
> who feels he can construe the policy to match the result he prefers.

Agreed.
The problem here (at least for me) was to understand why this (yet to
be reviewed) patch is about implementing a new feature and not about
bugfixing an existing one. So we're exactly in the fog around the
informal backpatch policy, and as long as we're able to continue
talking nicely about it, this seems the finest solution :)

Keep up the amazing work, regards,
--
dim




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf