On 02/20/2014 04:15 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
+1 for back-patching.
Back-patching would be interesting for existing applications, but -1
as it is a new feature :)
I think that it rises to the level of an omission in 9.3 that now
requires correction. Many of our users couldn't run pg_controldata
even if they'd heard of it...
We seem to have +Many against -1, so back-patched it now.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
