Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions
Date
Msg-id ca6ea1aa-827d-08d0-b546-29a9543eb3f7@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 12/7/21 13:59, Mark Dilger wrote:
>> On Dec 7, 2021, at 10:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not entirely following ... are you suggesting that each released minor
>> version needs to be kept buildable separately?
> No.  I'm just wondering if we want to share the product of such efforts if anybody (me, for instance) volunteers to
doit for some subset of minor releases.  For my heap corruption checking work, I might want to be able to build a small
numberof old minor releases that I know had corruption bugs.
 
>

I doubt there's going to be a whole lot of changes. You should just be
able to cherry-pick them in most cases I suspect.


cheers


andrew


--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Why doesn't pgstat_report_analyze() focus on not-all-visible-page dead tuple counts, specifically?
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: MSVC SSL test failure