Re: proposal: multiple psql option -c

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, dinesh kumar <dineshkumar02(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: multiple psql option -c
Date: 2015-12-02 05:33:06
Message-ID: CAFj8pRAJtPUxLTbmaEYnzC+3k-opnqhd+vgnwiQr_pBQxZ3UpA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi

> Yeah, I don't think that's a big issue either to be honest. The code
> is kept consistent a maximum with what is there previously.
>
> Patch is switched to ready for committer.
>

perfect

Thank you very much to all

Regards

Pavel

> --
> Michael
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kouhei Kaigai 2015-12-02 05:54:42 Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual
Previous Message Kouhei Kaigai 2015-12-02 05:04:39 Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual