On 28 January 2014 17:21, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote:
> I don't understand why anyone would want to turn this feature off, ie. > require stronger locks than necessary for a DDL change. Nobody would *want* to turn it off. They might need to, as explained. > If we're not confident that the patch is correct, then it should not be > applied. If we are confident enough to commit it, and a bug crops up later, > we'll fix the bug as usual. I'd like to point out here that my own customers are already well covered by the support services we offer. They will receive any such fix very quickly. My proposal was of assistance only to those without such contracts in place, as are many of my proposals. It doesn't bother me at all if you insist it should not be added. Just choose v16 of the patch for review rather than v17. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
