On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 2:02 AM Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-10-17 at 14:17 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > Fair enough. I'll wait till early next week (say till Monday EOD) > > > to > > > see if anyone thinks otherwise and push this patch to HEAD after > > > some > > > more testing and review. > > > > > > > Pushed. > > There was a brief discussion on backporting this here: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmob2mYpaUMT7aoFOukYTrpxt-WdgcitJnsjWhufnbDWEeg%40mail.gmail.com > > It looks like you opted not to backport it. Was there a reason for > that? The only risky thing I see there is a change in the Subscription > structure -- I suppose that could be used by extensions? >
Right, the same is pointed out by me in an email [1]. > (I am fine with it not being backported, but I was inclined to think it > should be backported.) > I don't mind backporting it if you think so but we need to ensure that we don't break any extensions. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1JztFkYeVANuH0Ja_c3zqDjTyz0j15xQqwCDRPokYhWgw%40mail.gmail.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
