Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jorgen Austvik - Sun Norway wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'd put it the other way around: likely we should get rid of the
>>> one use of @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Generally I prefer explicit over implicit (having the full paths make 
>> troubleshooting easier), but in this case you have the additional aspect of 
>> the lo_import operating relative to the client, while lo_export operates 
>> relative to the server.

> I submit that the test is OK as it currently is.

Yeah, I hadn't thought about the different-paths aspect at the time of
making the above comment; but given that, it is correct as-is.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to