| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Assert failure of the cross-check for nullingrels |
| Date: | 2023-06-06 20:22:30 |
| Message-ID: | 228188.1686082950@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> So, is this done? I see that you made other commits fixing related code
> several days after this email, but none seems to match the changes you
> posted in this patch; and also it's not clear to me that there's any
> test case where this patch is expected to change behavior. (So there's
> also a question of whether this is a bug fix or rather some icying on
> cake.)
Well, the bugs I was aware of ahead of PGCon are all fixed, but there
are some new reports I still have to deal with. I left the existing
open issue open, but maybe it'd be better to close it and start a new
one?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2023-06-06 20:37:26 | Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-06-06 20:20:40 | Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction |