On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 03:48:04PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:15:49AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > It seems to me that waiting for 9.6 for what's arguably a bug fix is too > > > much. It's not like this is a new feature. Why don't we just make sure > > > it is as correct as possible and get it done for 9.5? It's not even in > > > beta yet, nor feature freeze. > > > > Well, I applied what I thought would work, but did not handle three > > cases: > > > > * checking of hasoids by index specifications > > * queries with multiple LIKE'ed tables > > * matching inheritance behavior > > > > I am unclear if I should be addressing such complex issues at this point > > in the development cycle. I can certainly apply this patch, but I need > > someone else to tell me it is good and should be applied. I am also > > thinking such review time would be better spent on patches submitted > > long before mine. > > I have added regression tests to the patch, attached. I have included > Tom's test that doesn't directly use LIKE.
Patch applied. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
