"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I didn't think it merited back-patching.  It's strictly cosmetic in
>> terms of being about what VACUUM VERBOSE prints, no?

> Umm.. Whatever we decide on the fix, I think we should backpatch it to
> 8.3 because I am worried that someone way get completely confused with
> the current vacuum report,

"Somebody might misread an optional report" doesn't seem to me to be on
the same risk level as "we might destabilize a stable release".  The
policy of this project is that we only put nontrivial bug fixes into
back branches, and I don't think this item qualifies ...

                        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

Reply via email to