On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Selena Deckelmann <selena@chesnok.com> writes:
>> The check_temp_buffers() problem seems like a regression and blocks us
>> from upgrading to 9.2. The use case are functions that set
>> temp_buffers and occasionally are called in a series from a parent
>> session. The work around is... a lot of work.
>
> Uh ... how is that a regression? AFAIK it's been that way right along.
We're running 9.0 - looks like it changed in 9.1, last revision to the
relevant line was 6/2011. The group decided not to upgrade to 9.1 last
year, but was going to just go directly to 9.2 in the next few weeks.
-selena
--
http://chesnok.com
