* Tom Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I believe the attached patch does this now.  Under my test case it
> > correctly handled things.  I'm certainly happier with it this way and
> > apologize for not realizing this better approach sooner.  Please
> > comment.
> Applied (with trivial stylistic changes) as far back as 8.0, which
> was the first release that would try to continue after an error.

Great, thanks!  Now if I can convince you to look at the Kerberos patch
I posted on -hackers... ;)

        Thanks again,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to