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

Re: ProcessUtility_hook

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(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 01:35:27
Message-ID: 200912010135.nB11ZRk25773@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> 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?

Uh, I am new to this commitfest wiki thing, but it did have a review by
Euler Taveira de Oliveira:

	https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=196

and the author replied.  Is there more that needs to be done?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-12-01 01:38:18
Subject: Re: ProcessUtility_hook
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-12-01 01:33:05
Subject: Re: ProcessUtility_hook

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