On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 05:36:41PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 05:04:14PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >> > Slightly improved patch applied.
> >>
> >> Is it?
> >
> > The patch has a slightly modified 'if' statement to check a constant
> > before calling a function, and use elseif:
> >
> > < + if (!interpretOidsOption(stmt->options, true) && cxt.hasoids)
> > ---
> > > + if (cxt.hasoids && !interpretOidsOption(stmt->options, true))
> > 47c57
> > < + if (interpretOidsOption(stmt->options, true) && !cxt.hasoids)
> > ---
> > > + else if (!cxt.hasoids && interpretOidsOption(stmt->options, true))
> >
> > I realize the change is subtle.
>
> What I meant was - I didn't see an attachment on that message.
I didn't attach it as people have told me they can just as easily see
the patch via git, and since it was so similar, I didn't repost it.
Should I have? I can easily do that.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +