On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:12:33PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 23 January 2013 04:35, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Also, perhaps we should
> >> consider Simon's one-liner fix for backpatching this instead of the
> >> original patch you posted?
> > I have no nontrivial preference between the two approaches.
> Sorry, I didn't see this. I guess you saw I applied my one liner and
> backpatched it.
> I'm expecting to apply Noah's larger patch to HEAD with the suggested
> edits. I'll do that last thing in the CF.
What "suggested edits" do you have in mind?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2013-01-29 03:35:22|
|Subject: Re: autovacuum not prioritising for-wraparound tables|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2013-01-29 03:23:57|
|Subject: Re: Hm, table constraints aren't so unique as all that|