On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> 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.
No, I just misread your email. I thought you said you had attached
the patch; rereading it, I see that you said you had applied the
patch. Silly me.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company