Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> TBH I'd rather stick with the less invasive approach of the original patch
>> at this stage, and see about refactoring for 9.3.
> +1.
> While I haven't looked at the code specifically, these areas can be
> quite fragile and very environment-dependent. I'd rather not upset it
> this close to release - especially not after RC wrap.
Fair enough. Will one of you deal with the patch as-is, then?
regards, tom lane