On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 3:41 AM, FabrÃzio de Royes Mello <fabriziome...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: >> >> Sawada Masahiko wrote: >> >> > Thank you for reviewing. >> > I agree 2) - 5). >> > Attached patch is latest version patch I modified above. >> > Also, I noticed I had forgotten to add the patch regarding document of >> > reindexdb. >> >> Please don't use pg_catalog in the regression test. That way we will >> need to update the expected file whenever a new catalog is added, which >> seems pointless. Maybe create a schema with a couple of tables >> specifically for this, instead. >> > > Attached new regression test.
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1. 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/bin/scripts/t/090_reindexdb.pl.rej I tried to apply the 001 patch after applying the 000, but it was not applied cleanly. At least to me, it's more intuitive to use "SCHEMA" instead of "ALL IN SCHEMA" here because we already use "DATABASE" instead of "ALL IN DATABASE". Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
