Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZS32=dKKYhXd6C4OSoQU6t=k_rgXq37oDfuFxsR9-0Dw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT  (John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: Mark all GUC variable as PGDLLIMPORT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 10:07 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Yeah, the frontend error message rework in [1].  That has exactly
> the same constraint that it's likely to break other open patches,
> so it'd be better to do it after the CF cutoff.  I think that doing
> that concurrently with Robert's thing shouldn't be too risky, because
> it only affects frontend code while his patch should touch only backend.

So when *exactly* do we want to land these patches? None of the
calendar programs I use support "anywhere on earth" as a time zone,
but I think that feature freeze is 8am on Friday on the East coast of
the United States. If I commit the PGDLLIMPORT change within a few
hours after that time, is that good? Should I try to do it earlier,
before we technically hit 8am? Should I do it the night before, last
thing before I go to bed on Thursday? Do you care whether your commit
or mine goes in first?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow time delayed standbys and recovery
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres restart in the middle of exclusive backup and the presence of backup_label file