Tom Lane wrote:
> AgentM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Attached is a patch which corrects the behavior. I verified that the  
> > patch does not interfere with normal operation (using psql) but  
> > unfortunately the code path is virtually impossible to test without a  
> > really slow connection to a postgresql server [which I thankfully  
> > don't have].
> I'm still looking for some demonstration (not an unsupported assertion)
> that there's an issue here.  A patch you cannot test doesn't impress
> me at all --- what are the odds that it makes things worse not better?

Well, we have a documented case that we are not following the API.  In
that case, I don't consider it necessary for someone to provide a
reproducable failure (it might be quite rare and therefore hard to
demostrate).  It is enough we are not following the API and need to fix
our code.

  Bruce Momjian                        |               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to