Re: RULE regression test fragility?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Mike Blackwell <mike(dot)blackwell(at)rrd(dot)com>, PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RULE regression test fragility?
Date: 2013-10-26 15:27:19
Message-ID: 15201.1382801239@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> [ patch for \a\t mode in rules and sanity_check output ]

Committed with some minor adjustment of the comments.

>> +1 (but what are those silly parens in pg_seclabels definition?),

> That's because it contain several UNION ALLs and ruleutils makes sure
> the order is correct.

That looks weird to me too, but it's surely not the fault of this patch.
Maybe we should take a look at exactly what ruleutils is doing there.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-10-26 16:02:18 Re: RULE regression test fragility?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-10-26 14:04:29 Re: Changes to stringinfo.c