Re: tighten generic_option_name, or store more carefully in catalog?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Chapman Flack <jcflack(at)acm(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tighten generic_option_name, or store more carefully in catalog?
Date: 2025-06-02 19:23:25
Message-ID: 702396.1748892205@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Chapman Flack <jcflack(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
> On 06/02/25 14:13, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Here's a proposed patch for the "=" issue. Whether or not we should
>> rethink FDW validation behavior, doing so surely couldn't be
>> back-patched. But I think this much should be.

> LGTM

Pushed, thanks for looking at it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2025-06-02 19:30:42 Re: Correcting freeze conflict horizon calculation
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2025-06-02 19:06:07 ABI Compliance Checker GSoC Project