|From:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>|
|To:||Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: Add more information_schema columns|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2018-02-07 10:50:12 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2/7/18 00:14, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 10:45:52PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> I think what I had meant to write was something like
> >> (t.tgtype & (1 | 66))
> >> but maybe it's clearer to write it all out as you did.
> > If you prefer that, that's fine for me as well. I tend to prefer the
> > formulation where both expressions are separated to make clearer that
> > ordering needs to be split for all three characteristics.
> Committed with the separate entries.
Do we have a policy about catversion bumps for information schema
changes? A cluster from before this commit fails the regression tests
after the change, but still mostly works...
|Next Message||Nikita Glukhov||2018-02-13 23:04:17||Re: jsonpath|
|Previous Message||Tom Lane||2018-02-13 22:23:21||Re: [HACKERS] Client Connection redirection support for PostgreSQL|