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
