Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> writes: > The patch doesn't change what the code aims to do, only the way it > does it. The existing code does this: > ... > The net result /should/ be the same, but the second method is > apparently a little more robust.
Do we have any idea why? I am always distrustful of random changes made with no theory as to why they fix a problem. My experience is that such changes are almost always wrong, once you find out what the problem *really* is. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs