"Brendan Hill" <brendanh@jims.net> writes:
> Bit of a catch 22 - since it happens rarely, there's no definitive
> confirmation that it's fixed the problem.
> Also, not sure if I'm comfortable applying the change and recompiling
> myself, wouldn't have a clue where to start.
Uh, so you haven't actually tested it at all?
> I can't see how the change would hurt though, seems like a good idea
> regardless, what do you think?
I'm not really inclined to throw it in there just on speculation
that it *might* mask a bug that's really somewhere else.
I can't help you with producing a recompiled executable for Windows,
but there are other people around the list who can.
regards, tom lane
