| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, sahapasci(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_replication_slots page links |
| Date: | 2017-11-10 14:41:18 |
| Message-ID: | 26573.1510324878@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
> wrote:
>>> Because the name of the page has changed. Not much to do about that at
>>> this point.
> Is this going to affect a single page, pg_replication_slots, or is this a
> systematic change that's going to be hitting a whole class of pages?
I think this can be blamed on a9ba6195f, which I only back-patched as
far as 9.5 --- guess I didn't realize that the bogus section name
existed further back. So I think the answer to your direct question
is "a single page", but maybe we should instead proceed by bringing 9.4
into line with the later branches and then updating the docs?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-11-10 14:43:42 | Re: pg_replication_slots page links |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-11-10 14:30:47 | Re: pg_replication_slots page links |