Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > Attached patch reverses the check, and adds a failure message. I'd > appreciate a quick review in case I have the logic backwards in my head...
I think the patch is correct, but if there's any documentation of the walmethod APIs that would allow one to assert which side of the API got this wrong, I sure don't see it. Would it be unreasonable to insist on some documentation around that? 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