Re: Inaccuracy in wal_receiver_status_interval parameter description

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Dmitriy Kuzmin <kuzmin(dot)db4(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Inaccuracy in wal_receiver_status_interval parameter description
Date: 2021-02-25 02:41:47
Message-ID: YDcOa+r+iWcogyHs@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:16:57PM +1000, Dmitriy Kuzmin wrote:
> Will this change be made in the documentation for all Postgresql versions?

This wording has been introduced back in 2011 as of b186523, and
nobody complained about that until now, so I did not see a strong need
to back-patch it. Would people prefer a back-patch for that?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2021-02-25 06:54:54 Re: incoorect restore_command
Previous Message Dmitriy Kuzmin 2021-02-24 13:16:57 Re: Inaccuracy in wal_receiver_status_interval parameter description