Dave Page <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> OK. I can fix that while I'm busy hacking on guc.c. Does anyone care
>> enough about this to think it should be back-patched?
> I think it's worthwhile if the patch can be applied fairly easily to
> the older branches. If not, I don't think it's worth worrying about.
It's a pretty trivial patch. Will do.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
