Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 08:23:34AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> I'm just going to remove the test. This is not very future-proof and
> [ objections ] FWIW, I concur with Robert's choice here. This test method is ugly and fragile, and I'm not even thinking about the question of whether an installation might have GUC settings that affect it. My objection is that you're assuming that nowhere else, anywhere in the large amount of code executed by the queries under test, will anyone ever wish to insert another elog(DEBUG) message. > I used the same strategy in another ALTER TABLE patch this CF: > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20120126033956.gc15...@tornado.leadboat.com That's going to need to be removed before commit too, then. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
