Re: [HACKERS] WAL consistency check facility

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] WAL consistency check facility
Дата
Msg-id 3649.1487117573@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] WAL consistency check facility  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] WAL consistency check facility  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just for curiosity: does the moment when the code has been written or
>> committed counts? It's no big deal seeing how liberal the Postgres
>> license is, but this makes me wonder...

> IANAL, but I think if you ask one, he or she will tell you that what
> matters is the date the work was created.  In the case of code, that
> means when the code was written.

FWIW, my own habit when creating new PG files is generally to write
* Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2017, PostgreSQL Global Development Group* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the
Universityof California
 

even if it's "all new" code.  The main reason being that it's hardly ever
the case that you didn't copy-and-paste some amount of stuff out of a
pre-existing file, and trying to sort out how much of what originated
exactly when is an unrewarding exercise.  Even if it is basically all
new code, this feels like giving an appropriate amount of credit to
Those Who Went Before Us.
        regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove all references to "xlog"from SQL-callable functions in p
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Missing CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in hash joins