On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 6:02 PM Ian Barwick <ian.barwick@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 6/7/19 9:00 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 03:44:14PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > Or is that not worth bothering except on HEAD? Thoughts?
>
> Personally I don't think it's that critical, but not bothered either way.
> Presumably no-one has complained so far anyway (I only chanced upon the missing
> GUC description because I was poking about looking for examples of custom
> GUC handling...)
I think it worth maintaining consistent documentation and GUC
descriptions in back branches. So, I'm +1 for backpatching.
I'm going to commit all 3 patches (documentation, GUC description,
documentation indentation) on no objections.
------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
