Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2014-03-27 08:02:35 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Buildfarm member prairiedog thinks there's something unreliable about
>> commit f01d1ae3a104019d6d68aeff85c4816a275130b3:
> That's rather odd. It has survived for a couple of months on the other
> buildfarm animals now... Could one of you apply the attached patch
> adding more details to eventual failures?
Any objection to separating out the have_mappings bit? It wasn't terribly
appropriate before, but it seems really out of place in this formulation.
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
