Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 06:19:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It looks like that patch is meant to resolve misbehaviors equivalent to
>> this one that already exist in several other places. So fixing this
>> one along with the other ones seems like an appropriate thing to do
>> when that lands.
> Well, would this specific change land in REL_15_STABLE?
I wouldn't object to doing that, and even back-patching. It looked
like a pretty sane change, and we've learned before that skimping on
back-branch test infrastructure is a poor tradeoff.
regards, tom lane
