On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 05:32:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:07:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Any other votes out there?
>
> > Well, I was concerned yesterday that we had a broken build farm so close
> > to release. (I got consistent regression failures.) I think PG 11 would
> > be better for this feature change, so I support reverting this.
>
> I'll take the blame for (most of) yesterday's failures in the v10
> branch, but they were unrelated to this patch --- they were because
> of that SIGBUS patch I messed up. So that doesn't seem like a very
> applicable argument. Still, it's true that this seems like the most
> consequential patch that's gone into v10 post-RC1, certainly so if
> you discount stuff that was back-patched further than v10.
Oh, I couldn't untangle that the regression failures were unrelated to
enums, so please ignore my opinion.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs