Re: relation OID in ReorderBufferToastReplace error message - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bossart, Nathan
Subject Re: relation OID in ReorderBufferToastReplace error message
Date
Msg-id FCBAF3CC-52EE-4E58-AF37-6D95330688DA@amazon.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: relation OID in ReorderBufferToastReplace error message  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: relation OID in ReorderBufferToastReplace error message  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
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

Nathan


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson