Re: Pre-v11 appearances of the word "procedure" in v11 docs

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Pre-v11 appearances of the word "procedure" in v11 docs
Date: 2018-08-21 15:57:15
Message-ID: 1de15117-b736-2239-ade4-11b1e884681b@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 17/08/2018 21:57, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Attached are my proposed patches.
>
> I take it that you propose all 3 for backpatch to v11?

yes

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bossart, Nathan 2018-08-21 16:01:50 Re: Improve behavior of concurrent ANALYZE/VACUUM
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-08-21 15:56:16 Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c)