(2018/12/20 9:31), Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 06:12:12PM +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> I think so too. I think it might be better to add regression tests for the
>> view case as well, though.
>
> Agreed.
Cool.
>>> Would you like to
>>> update the patch yourself?
>>
>> I'd be happy if you worked on that.
>
> Attached is the patch with two new test cases blowing with wal_level =
> minimal. On HEAD, I suggest that we use RELKIND_CAN_HAVE_STORAGE to not
> fall again in this trap in the future. For back-branches, let's just
> add the appropriate relkind checks as suggested upthread.
To make maintenance easy, I think it might be better to add the
appropriate relkind checks on HEAD as well. Other than that, the patch
looks good to me.
> Please note
> that the attached patch is for HEAD, and I'll adjust for other branches.
> The view part needs to go down to v10, and the part for foreign tables
> down to v11.
Thanks for the updated patch!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita