Re: Adding a note to protocol.sgml regarding CopyData

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, bpd0018(at)gmail(dot)com, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Adding a note to protocol.sgml regarding CopyData
Date: 2018-10-01 06:36:52
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 08:16:46PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Yeah, I don't see why we need to document it three times in the same
> chapter.
> Also, that chapter is specifically about version 3.0 of the protocol, so
> documenting version 2.0 is out of scope.

This has been marked as returned with feedback per the last bits of the

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rajkumar Raghuwanshi 2018-10-01 06:39:14 Re: Multiple primary key on partition table?
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-10-01 06:34:17 Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq