On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 5:22 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Huh? I think we might be miscommunicating here. My point isn't about the
> *earliest* release affected, it's about the *latest* version without a
> fix. IOW, until when is there a supported release without a fix.
Got it.
> And once 12 is not supported anymore, 11 is also unsupported. So we'd
> have a live bug (which would mainly hit while investigating issues)
> until 12 is unsupported?
> > To be very precise: I imagine that Victor was using bt_metap() in
> > production on a Postgres 12 installation because he wanted to make
> > sure that his installation had the new stuff (he did a talk about it
> > at EU, so clearly it's of interest to him). The problem is
> > nevertheless not new to Postgres 12.
> >
> > > I'd just do the s/%u/%d/.
> >
> > That's a pretty gross hack. So be it.
>
> Yea, it is.
Right. But we only need the gross kludge on 11 and 12 -- there is no
"%u" to change on earlier Postgres versions. That will allow all
Postgres/pageinspect versions to at least manage to consistently
display something within the bt_metap() fields.
--
Peter Geoghegan
