Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> The reason I think it's OK to change the behavior in the back-branches
> is that (a) the only thing it affects is logging, so it shouldn't
> really "break" anything, and (b) apparently nobody has noticed that
> the interpretation of the GUC is off by three orders of magnitude, so
> either nobody's using it or they're not looking at what's actually
> happening too carefully.
It might be that nobody's using any values other than 0 and -1 ...
in which case it wouldn't matter anyway. I agree that the lack of
bug reports is notable. But still, don't we try to avoid behavioral
changes in stable branches?
I'm not dead set against doing what you propose, just think it needs
some discussion.
regards, tom lane
