Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> >> Tom Lane escribi?:
> >>> That would be an argument for sticking this in the next CF, not for
> >>> applying it now --- it was submitted after the close of the last CF no?
> >
> >> Sep. 29 2009?
> >
> > Oh, I was thinking it had just come in recently, but looking back you're
> > right. ?It did slip through the cracks.
> >
> > However, has the patch actually been reviewed? ?pg_dump is a piece of
> > code where it is notoriously easy for novices to do things wrong,
> > and this is especially true for adding output that should only come out
> > in particular cases.
>
> It's a fairly trivial patch. I took a quick look at it. It needs
> more than that, but I think not too much more. I think it would be
> less effort for someone to review it and make a decision than it would
> be to keep it as an open item for the next 6 months.
Agreed, applied, and TODO updated.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.comPG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do + If your life is a hard
drive,Christ can be your backup. +
