On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 20:44 +0100, Markus Wanner wrote:
> As described before in this thread, I think we might be able to do
> without the "has checksum"-bit, as yet another simplification. But I
> don't object to adding it, either.
I see. For a first patch, I guess that's OK. Might as well make it as
simple as possible. We probably need to decide what to do there before
9.3 is released though.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
