Re: jsonpath versus NaN

From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: jsonpath versus NaN
Date: 2020-07-07 22:17:45
Message-ID: CAPpHfdveGwW8iQ_PPhaN-uD99CP3eh-Pd91+o-qG0XWpMXjneA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 1:16 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I'm going to push 0002 if there is no objection.
> > Regarding 0001, I think my new error messages need review.
>
> I do intend to review these, just didn't get to it yet.

OK, that you for noticing. I wouldn't push anything before your review.

------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiro Ikeda 2020-07-07 23:12:45 Re: change a function name in a comment correctly
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-07-07 22:16:42 Re: jsonpath versus NaN