Re: Is this a bug?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>
Subject: Re: Is this a bug?
Date: 2014-08-21 23:17:17
Message-ID: 20140821231717.GD17771@momjian.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 09:11:46AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello
> > <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >>> Well, it's fairly harmless, but it might not be a bad idea to tighten that
> >>> up.
> >> The attached patch tighten that up.
> > Hm... It might be interesting to include it in 9.4 IMO, somewhat
> > grouping with what has been done in a6542a4 for SET and ABORT.
>
> Meh. There will always be another thing we could squeeze in; I don't
> think this is particularly urgent, and it's late to the party.

Do we want this patch for 9.5? It throws an error for invalid reloption
specifications.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2014-08-21 23:57:58 Re: pgcrypto: PGP signatures
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2014-08-21 23:14:24 Re: ALTER TABLESPACE MOVE command tag tweak