On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 13:17, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alex Hunsaker <bada...@gmail.com> writes: >> You get a segfault as we try to SvREFCNT_dec(...); > > Hmm. I don't see a segfault on my machine, but I agree that this looks > bogus. I changed it to this order instead: > [ ... ] > so as to keep the "state restore" operations together.
Even better Thanks! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
