Re: BUG #15552: Unexpected error in COPY to a foreign table in a transaction

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Etsuro Fujita <fujita(dot)etsuro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Luis Carril <luis(dot)carril(at)swarm64(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: BUG #15552: Unexpected error in COPY to a foreign table in a transaction
Date: 2018-12-23 07:50:45
Message-ID: 20181223075045.GC1726@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 04:51:23PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> The conflicts would be a bit annoying yes, still those are minimal so
> I would still use the macro on HEAD. Let's see if others have an
> opinion. We will have a divergence between v10 and v11 anyway as v11
> has added support for COPY with foreign tables, and v10 has added
> support for COPY with views.

Finally done and committed down to v10 as adapted.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Viorel Tabara 2018-12-23 22:36:53 Re: BUG #15563: postgresql11-server must require postgresql-llvmjit
Previous Message PG Bug reporting form 2018-12-23 04:12:52 BUG #15563: postgresql11-server must require postgresql-llvmjit