Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> On 8/17/09 11:51 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I went over this quickly, and attach an updated version. This is
>> updated to current CVS HEAD, and wordsmithed a little bit, and I removed
>> some things that didn't seem worth documenting. In particular, the
>> introduction claims that back-patched bug fixes won't be documented
>> here, which I agree with (at least for minor fixes); but that policy
>> wasn't being applied consistently.
> I thought the Windows memory thing was a back-patch?
It is, but it seems worth mentioning for testing purposes, since it's
a portability issue. See prior discussion.
regards, tom lane
