| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steven Pousty <steve(dot)pousty(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pierre Giraud <pierre(dot)giraud(at)dalibo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
| Date: | 2020-04-30 03:26:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20585.1588217180@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Clearly I was caught doing a single browser test (Chrome).
Well, I've not tested anything but Safari, either ...
> Reverted back to the verbose way sans !important, attached, which
> appears to be the consensus. If you can ACK this, I'll commit.
This one works for me.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2020-04-30 03:37:24 | Re: Bug with subqueries in recursive CTEs? |
| Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2020-04-30 03:18:49 | Bug with subqueries in recursive CTEs? |