On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 15:09 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Jeff, do you think we need more review of this patch?
> In the patch, it refers to rd_options without checking for NULL first,
> which needs to be fixed.
> There's actually still one place where it says "id" rather than "is".
> Just a nitpick.
> Regarding my point 4 from the previous email, I mildly disagree with the
> style, but I don't see a correctness problem there.
> If the first two items are fixed, then the patch is fine with me.
First two items are fixed in attached version of the patch.
With best regards,
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2012-11-02 11:17:40|
|Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed
|Previous:||From: Alexander Korotkov||Date: 2012-11-02 08:47:05|
|Subject: Re: SP-GiST for ranges based on 2d-mapping and quad-tree|