On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:44 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 11:18:24AM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 2:44 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 02:14:50PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > > > Maybe I'm missing something, but I can see several instances of the
> > > > "eval-bool ? true : false" pattern after fd0625c7a9 that are not in
> > > > the latest 0002.
> > >
> > > Yep. There are more of these, and I have just looked at some of them
> > > as of the patches proposed. What was sent looked clean enough to
> > > progress a bit and be done with it.
> >
> > While reading the decode.c I found the extra parentheses and arrived
> > at this thread.
>
> I'm not quite sure how you managed to search for it - well done ;)
I could not find the recent thread, though :)
>
> > The discussion seems to get inactive now but one (0001
> > patch) out of two patches Justin proposed [1] is not committed yet and
> > there seems no CF entry for this item (0002 patch already got
> > committed, fd0625c7a9). 0001 patch can be cleanly applied and looks
> > good to me.
>
> Note that I also included it here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20210924215827.GS831@telsasoft.com
Good. Thank you for the information!
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/