On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> Robert Haas escribió:
>> I was all prepared to admit that I hadn't actually looked at the patch
>> carefully enough, but I just looked at (and CVS HEAD) again and what
>> you've written here doesn't appear to describe what I'm seeing in the
>> if ((portal->strategy != PORTAL_ONE_SELECT) && (!portal->holdStore))
>> FillPortalStore(portal, isTopLevel);
>> So one of us is confused... it may well be me.
> Ah, it seems I misread it ... but then I don't quite see the point in
> that change.
Well the point is just that Zoltan is adding some more code that
applies to both branches of the switch, so merging them saves some
> Well, not doing a full review anyway, so never mind me.
Actually I was sort of hoping you (or someone other than me) would
pick this up for commit...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Garick Hamlin||Date: 2010-02-11 19:45:13|
|Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server
continuously retry restoring the next WAL|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-02-11 19:40:51|
|Subject: Re: log_error_verbosity function display|