> On Aug 18, 2018, at 8:45 PM, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 03:38:47PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: >>> On Saturday, August 18, 2018, Dave Cramer <p...@fastcrypt.com> wrote: >>> I was referring to: >>> >>> "Materialized views are a type of relation so it is not wrong, just one >>> of many instances where we generalize to "relation" based in implementation >>> details ins team of being explicit about which type of relation is being >>> affected." >>> >>> As being push back. >>> >>> I don't have an opinion on back patching this. >> >> I was arguing against back patching on the basis of defining this as a >> bug. It's not wrong nor severe enough to warrant the side effects others >> have noted. > > I am not so sure about v11 as it is very close to release, surely we can > do something for HEAD as that's cosmetic. Anyway, if something is > proposed, could a patch be posted? The only patch I am seeing on this > thread refers to improvements for error messages of procedures.
Oops, too much multitasking. I will attach the correct patch when I get home. Jonathan
