Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 2013-08-30 18:55:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Not sure. It's pretty disturbing that this wasn't caught earlier; >> it seems to me that means there's no regression coverage that hits >> ExecReScanMergeAppend. However, I don't much like this specific test case >> because it seems like hitting the bug could depend on what series of >> random values you get.
> Hm, that should be fixable. How about: Looks good, applied. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs