On 04/27/2017 03:14 AM, David Rowley wrote:
On 27 April 2017 at 06:41, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 4/19/17 08:42, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
I reviewed the patch. It compiles clean, make check-world passes. I do
not see any issue with it.
Looks reasonable. Let's keep it for the next commit fest.
Thank you to both of you for looking. I'd thought that maybe the new
stuff in PG10 should be fixed before the release. If we waited, and
fix in PG11 then backpatching is more of a pain.
However, I wasn't careful in the patch to touch only new to PG10 code.
I'll defer to your better judgment and add to the next 'fest.
I think that's a very good argument. Cleaning up code that's new in this
version seems like a fair game, and a good idea. The places that are not
new in PostgreSQL 10 are more questionable, but seems harmless enough
anyway.
Did you have an outright objection to this, Peter? The patch looks good
to me at a quick glance, I think we should commit this now.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
