Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: ProcessUtility_hook

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ProcessUtility_hook
Date: 2009-12-01 01:33:05
Message-ID: 15694.1259631185@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> I have applied this patch, with only a minor wording improvement:

Uh, we weren't even done reviewing this were we?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2009-12-01 01:35:27
Subject: Re: ProcessUtility_hook
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-12-01 01:18:24
Subject: Re: Deleted WAL files held open by backends in Linux

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group