| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Suraj Kharage <suraj(dot)kharage(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: extra semicolon in postgres_fdw test cases |
| Date: | 2021-03-31 04:17:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KJdaEfkmwa3JnPvUK3nQFDiHpF1p7bDHPBwDU0Gfr88w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:35 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 05:00:53PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > Looks good to me as well but I think one can choose not to backpatch
> > as there is no functional impact but OTOH, there is some value in
> > keeping tests/code consistent.
>
> FWIW, I would not bother with the back branches for just that, but if
> you feel that this is better, of course feel free.
>
Fair enough. I'll push this just for HEAD.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-03-31 04:34:01 | Re: pg_amcheck contrib application |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2021-03-31 04:07:51 | Re: unconstrained memory growth in long running procedure stored procedure after upgrading 11-12 |