On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-08-04 13:52:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Not sure whether we should consider it a back-patchable bug fix or
>> something to do only in HEAD, though --- comments?
>
> Tentatively I'd say it's a bug and should be back-patched.
Agreed. If investigation turns up reasons to worry about
back-patching it, I'd possibly back-track on that position, but I
think we should start with the notion that it is back-patchable and
retreat from that position only at need.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
