| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: Core dump with nested CREATE TEMP TABLE |
| Date: | 2016-01-30 21:28:47 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmob_+dhMvJLrmvsGQqks4jgdisrRZtp5TLqk+zZ7gygUdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> You could offer that paragraph as an objection to almost all Assert(), elog(),
> and automated tests. Why levy it against this patch? The valuable ways
> assertions and tests supplement review are well-established.
Sure, that's true, but I don't view all situations in the same way, so
I don't write the same thing in answer to each one. I think I've
pretty much said what I have to say about this; if nothing I wrote up
until now swayed you, it's unlikely that anything else I say after
this point will either.
>> You may be right, but then again Tom had a different opinion, even
>> after seeing your patch, and he's no dummy.
>
> Eh? Tom last posted to this thread before I first posted a patch.
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/29758.1451780533@sss.pgh.pa.us
seems to me to be a vote against the concept embodied by the patch.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-01-30 21:34:02 | Re: [PATCH] better systemd integration |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2016-01-30 21:09:33 | Re: pglogical_output - a general purpose logical decoding output plugin |