Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoaxGGZyUAWQMz7c-3V85TV5-w2wmvpOYrLnALi2d9Z-dQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> I spent a while reading through this today. I see a few decisions >> here or there that are debatable, in the sense that somebody else >> might have chosen to do it differently, but I don't see anything that >> actually looks wrong. So, committed. > > The buildfarm's opinion of it is lower than yours. Just eyeballing > the failures, I'd say there was some naivete about the reproducibility > of tuple CTIDs across different platforms. Is there a good reason > these test cases need to print CTID? Uggh, I missed the fact that they were doing that. It's probably actually useful test coverage, but it's not surprising that it isn't stable. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: