Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Another bug in pg_operator.h
Date: 1998-10-29 16:52:46
Message-ID: 4858.909679966@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Yes. See include/catalog/template1_check.sql. Uses SQL to do checks.

Hmm. OK, that script has some overlap with what I did last night.
But is it run automatically? I think putting the checks into a
regression test is a better plan.

Also, in playing around with template1_check.sql, I discovered that
pg_operator OID 644

DATA(insert OID = 644 ( "<>" PGUID 0 b t f 30 30 16 644 649 0 0 oid8ne neqsel neqjoinsel ));

points to a nonexistent operator --- there is no oid8ne in pg_proc, nor
in the code... anyone feel like fixing it?

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Taral 1998-10-29 17:05:38 RE: [HACKERS] Open 6.4 items
Previous Message Vince Vielhaber 1998-10-29 16:48:03 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] 'pgsql/src/include/catalog pg_operator.h'