On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Thomas Munro
> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> Here is a version that includes an attempt to describe the
>> situation in the documentation.
>
> Pushed with minor adjustments to the docs. Mostly I thought your
> new text was more appropriate as just another paragraph than as a
> "note". The previous paragraph was a little imprecise and was in
> some conflict with the new one, so I adjusted that a little, too.
>
> Nice work! I sure wish we had spotted that a one-line check there
> would have covered so much when the feature was first added.
>
> I understand there is considerable feeling that this should be
> back-patched, but I have not done that pending a clear consensus on
> the point, since it is a user-visible behavioral change.
I think that's a good call. Conservatism in back-patching is entirely
warranted.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
