Re: New Object Access Type hooks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joshua Brindle <joshua(dot)brindle(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Joe Conway <joe(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: New Object Access Type hooks
Date: 2022-03-22 18:01:59
Message-ID: 2572811.1647972119@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> OK, I have pushed that.

It seems like you could remove the NO_INSTALLCHECK restriction
too. You already removed the comment defending it, and it
seems to work fine as an installcheck now if I remove that
locally.

Other nitpicks:

* the IsParallelWorker test could use a comment

* I notice a typo "permisisons" in test_oat_hooks.sql

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-03-22 18:04:11 Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-03-22 18:00:06 Re: pg_walinspect - a new extension to get raw WAL data and WAL stats