Re: The two "XML Fixes" patches still in need of review

From: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Markus Winand <markus(dot)winand(at)winand(dot)at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: The two "XML Fixes" patches still in need of review
Date: 2019-03-24 01:21:57
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 03/23/19 18:20, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 03/23/19 17:05, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I've now pushed a somewhat-adjusted version of the XML-content fix
>> patch. The documentation patch needs some small rebasing to apply
>> after that one instead of before it.
> Will do.
>> Perhaps it'd make sense under the XML section in datatype.sgml,
>> but I think I might lean to making it a new section in Appendix D
>> (SQL Conformance).
> Sounds like the option (4) I proposed back in [1]. I suppose it won't
> be much trouble to move.

PFA xml-functions-type-docfix-4.patch rebased, and with the limits/
compatibility section moved to Appendix D.


Attachment Content-Type Size
xml-functions-type-docfix-4.patch text/x-patch 30.5 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2019-03-24 01:26:03 Re: Pluggable Storage - Andres's take
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2019-03-24 01:03:43 Re: SQL statement PREPARE does not work in ECPG