On 2013-06-06 10:22:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:29 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> >> Yeah, I think it's fine. The patch also looks fine, although I think
> >> the comments could use a bit of tidying. I guess we need to
> >> back-patch this all the way back to 8.4? It will require some
> >> adjustments for the older branches.
> >
> > I think 9.2 is actually far enough and it should apply there. Before
> > that we only logged the unsetting of all_visible via
> > heap_(inset|update|delete)'s wal records not the setting as far as I can
> > tell. So I don't immediately see a danger < 9.2.
>
> OK. I have committed this. For 9.2, I had to backport
> log_newpage_buffer() and use XLByteEQ rather than ==.
Thanks!
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services