Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZGn7MmMGRu4NkfxyXKSCzmvq1JvqsWm=hN=GJDMTfTKg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> Doesn't have to be a trigger, could be a CHECK constraint, datatype input
> function, etc. Admittedly, having a datatype input function that inserts to
> the table is worth a "huh?", but I'm feeling very confident that we can
> catch all such cases, and some of them might even be sensible.

Is this sentence missing a "not"?  i.e. "I'm not feeling very confident"?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WAL logging problem in 9.4.3?