Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > Apropos back branches: I think 52eed3d426 et al wasn't reverted and we > didn't really agree on a solution?
I think we agreed what we wanted to do instead, but actually doing it
is on my queue and hasn't reached the front yet. In any case, 52eed3d426
is better than no fix.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
