Hi,
On 2019/03/26 10:15, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Done as you suggested, with a minimal set enough to trigger the crash,
> still the error message is rather misleading as you would expect :)
Thanks for committing.
>> A separate thread will definitely attract more attention, at least in due
>> time. :)
>
> Sure. For now I have committed a lighter version of 0001, with
> tweaked comments based on your suggestion, as well as a minimum set of
> test cases. I have added on the way some tests for range partitions
> which have been missing from the start, and improved the existing set
> by removing the original "a.a" references, and switching to use
> max(date) for range partitions to bump correctly on the aggregate
> error. I am just updating the second patch now and I'll begin a new
> thread soon.
Thanks.
Regards,
Amit
