On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>>> Update docs on numeric storage requirements.
>>>
>>> Since 9.1, the minimum overhead is three bytes, not five.
>>
>> Thanks for the commit!
>>
>> I think that it's worth backporting this to 9.1. Thought?
>
> I thought about it, but it didn't seem important enough to bother with.

Yes, most v9.1 users would not bother that. But some actually did that.
I reported this issue because I received the complaint from them. So I'm
still thinking that it's worth backporting unless the backport needs
unacceptable lots of effort.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

• Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update docs on numeric storage requirements. at 2012-03-23 02:12:30 from Robert Haas

Responses

• Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update docs on numeric storage requirements. at 2012-03-23 12:51:12 from Robert Haas

pgsql-docs by date

Next:	From: Robert Haas	Date: 2012-03-23 12:51:12
	Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update docs on numeric storage requirements.
Previous:	From: Robert Haas	Date: 2012-03-23 02:12:30
	Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update docs on numeric storage requirements.

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: User Fxjr	Date: 2012-03-23 12:45:49
	Subject: npgsql - Npgsql2: [#1011161] Bug in NpgsqlCommand while getting readers
Previous:	From: Robert Haas	Date: 2012-03-23 02:12:30
	Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Update docs on numeric storage requirements.