| From: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Random pg_upgrade test failure on drongo |
| Date: | 2024-01-10 15:00:01 |
| Message-ID: | 1a02bee2-77ae-5553-1417-5a7fd481cd42@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
10.01.2024 13:37, Amit Kapila wrote:
> But tomorrow it could be for other tables and if we change this
> TRUNCATE logic for pg_largeobject (of which chances are less) then
> there is always a chance that one misses changing this comment. I feel
> keeping it generic in this case would be better as the problem is
> generic but it is currently shown for pg_largeobject.
Yes, for sure. So let's keep it generic as you prefer.
Thank you!
Best regards,
Alexander
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2024-01-10 15:03:08 | Re: POC: Extension for adding distributed tracing - pg_tracing |
| Previous Message | Anthonin Bonnefoy | 2024-01-10 14:54:54 | Re: POC: Extension for adding distributed tracing - pg_tracing |