> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:01 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > The patchset is now pretty granularly split into individual pieces.
Wow, thanks! > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 9:33 AM Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Regression tests that use \d+ to show the table details might > not be interested specifically in table access method. But these will > fail if run with a modified default access method. I see your point, but if a test is not interested specifically in a table am, then I guess it wouldn't use a custom table am in the first place, right? Any way, I don't have strong opinion here, so if everyone agrees that HIDE_TABLEAM will show/hide access method unconditionally, I'm fine with that.
