Magnus Hagander a écrit :
> CC:ing your explanation back to the list for others to see.
>
> //Magnus
>
>
> Mickael Deloison wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is just meant for having same length as the other messages :
>> [PGSQUERY], [PGSWARNG], [PGSEXCPT]
>> If you do not like that, I (or you) can chang
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Mickael Deloison wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is just meant for having same length as the other messages :
>> [PGSQUERY], [PGSWARNG], [PGSEXCPT]
>> If you do not like that, I (or you) can change it. Keep me posted.
What we normally do is pad
CC:ing your explanation back to the list for others to see.
//Magnus
Mickael Deloison wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is just meant for having same length as the other messages :
> [PGSQUERY], [PGSWARNG], [PGSEXCPT]
> If you do not like that, I (or you) can change it. Keep me posted.
>
> Regards,
> Mick
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Sorry for the delay in reviewing.
>
> Does using "[PGSWARNG]" really make sense? It saves only *two*
> characters over the much more readanle "[PGSWARNING]"
Urgh. Definitely less readable.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http:/
Hi!
Sorry for the delay in reviewing.
Does using "[PGSWARNG]" really make sense? It saves only *two*
characters over the much more readanle "[PGSWARNING]"
//Magnus
Mickael Deloison wrote:
> Hi pgadmin hackers,
>
> First, let me wish you a very happy new year 2009.
>
> Then, here is a patch f
