On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Jaime Casanova <ja...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Is it reasonable to fix this now, and if so should I bump catversion >>> or leave it alone? My own preference is to fix it in pg_proc.h but >>> not touch catversion; but you could argue that different ways. > >> are you planning to backpatch this? > > I wasn't planning to; as you say, without field complaints it doesn't > seem compelling to fix in existing releases. >
ok, then is up to you if you think that it is worth an initdb in beta... i still think is excessive... btw, is it worth documenting that somewhere for older releases? -- Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
