> It'd be great to have 01 committed. It seems to me like a solid and low cost
> solution for the torn pg_control (and missed backup lables). These are good
> improvements for base backups.

I'd like to second this, if possible. It's not exactly a "glamorous" or
critical issue, but this _does_ address a known issue re: torn pg_control if
nothing else. Based on the conversation I saw here, it seems like there's no
impetus so the patch is merely languishing, sans any lingering unaddressed
criticism.

Does it just need a committer to take ownership?

-- 
Shaun Thomas
Principal Software Engineer
[email protected]


Reply via email to