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 http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate