On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 3:40 AM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/23/21, 11:26 AM, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> > On 2021-Sep-23, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/22/21 20:11, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 3:06 AM Jeremy Schneider <schnjere@amazon.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Any chance of back-patching this?
> >> >
> >> > Normally, we don't back-patch code improvements unless they fix some
> >> > bug or avoid future back-patch efforts. So, I am not inclined to
> >> > back-patch this but if others also feel strongly about this then we
> >> > can consider it.
> >>
> >> The original thread about the logical replication bugs spawned a few
> >> different threads and code changes. The other code changes coming out of
> >> those threads were all back-patched, but I guess I can see arguments
> >> both ways on this one.
> >
> > I think that for patches that are simple debugging aids we do
> > backpatch, with the intent to get them deployed in users' systems as
> > soon and as widely possible. I did that in this one, for example
>
> +1 for back-patching
>
I can take care of backpatching this in the next few days unless there
is any objection.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
