Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoZ+OPnhE9owE0a0ig7F31-GyJkteTuKj1g3PCWgrD=2LQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6  (Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения 
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Etsuro Fujita
<fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> On 2017/04/04 18:01, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> I rebased the patch also.  Please find attached an updated version of the
>> patch.
>
> I rebased the patch to HEAD.  PFA a new version of the patch.

Tom, you were instrumental in identifying what was going wrong here
initially.  Any chance you'd be willing to have a look at the patch?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90
Следующее
От: David Steele
Дата:
Сообщение: [HACKERS] Update low-level backup documentation to match actual behavior