On 1 September 2017 at 15:19, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> I've added tests to the recent patch to show it works. > > I don't think those test cases prove anything (ie, they work fine > on an unpatched server). With a backslash maybe they would. > >> Any objection to me backpatching this, please say. > > This patch makes me itch. Why is it correct for these three checks, > and only these three checks out of the couple dozen uses of isTopLevel > in standard_ProcessUtility, to instead do something else?
No problem, it was a quick fix, not a deep one. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
