On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 03:45:11PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 2:57 PM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, it took a while to figure out how to make that work, but I > > believe I've got it now. Attached please find a couple of patches that > > should get the job done. They might need a bit of polish, but I think > > the basic concepts are sound. > > So, would people like these patches (1) committed to master only, (2) > committed to master and back-patched into v15, or (3) not committed at > all? Michael argued upthread that it was too risky to be tinkering > with things at this stage in the release cycle and, certainly, the > more time goes by, the more true that gets. But I'm not convinced that > these patches involve an inordinate degree of risk, and using beta as > a time to fix things that turned out to be buggy is part of the point > of the whole thing. On the other hand, the underlying issue isn't that > serious either, and nobody seems to have reviewed the patches in > detail, either. I don't mind committing them on my own recognizance if > that's what people would prefer; I can take responsibility for fixing > anything that is further broken, as I suppose would be expected even > if someone else did review. But, I don't want to do something that > other people feel is the wrong thing to have done.
This behavior is new in PG 15, and I would be worried to have one new behavior in PG 15 and another one in PG 16. Therefore, I would like to see it in PG 15 and master. I also think not doing anything and leaving these zero-length files around would also be risky. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
