On 2016/03/07 19:11, Amit Langote wrote: > we should re-introduce[1] a fixed-size char st_progress_message[] field.
Sorry, that [1] does not refer to anything, just a leftover from my draft. I thought I had a link handy for an email where some sort of justification was given as to why st_progress_message field was removed from the patch. I couldn't find it. Thanks, Amit -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
