| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations |
| Date: | 2021-10-14 21:21:47 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wz=7HKJ9WzAh7+M0JfwJ1yfT9qoE+KPa3P7iGToPOtGhXg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 2:13 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> TBH, I seriously doubt this test case is worth expending buildfarm
> cycles on forevermore. I'm more than a bit tempted to just drop
> it, rather than also expending developer time figuring out why it's
> not as portable as it looks.
I agree. I can go remove the whole file now, and will.
Mark: Any objections?
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-10-14 21:24:33 | Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-10-14 21:18:01 | Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-10-14 21:24:33 | Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-10-14 21:18:01 | Re: BUG #17212: pg_amcheck fails on checking temporary relations |