On 04/06/2017 08:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes:
>> I'm going to push the attached in a few hours unless there is any
>> additional discussion. As stated above we'll do the regression changes
>> in a separate patch once that is sorted. I used Tom's approach and
>> comment wording for 0001a.
> Looks generally sane, but I noticed a grammatical nitpick:
> -      * Only attributes within regular relation or partition relations have
> +      * Only attributes within regular relations or partition relations have

Good call -- thanks!

Any thoughts on whether 0001a and 0001b ought to be backpatched? I'm
thinking not given the lack of past complaints but it might make sense
to do.


Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to