> Far as I know, we were OK on that before.
We weren't last time I tested (there was a thread on this a while ago),
but...
> This is per spec, no?
... it sure is. Looks great!
- Thomas
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Jan Wieck
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Tom Lane
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Bruce Momjian
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Tom Lane
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Jan Wieck
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKE... Jan Wieck
- Re: GET DIAGNOSTICS (was Re: [HACKERS] O... Jan Wieck
- [HACKERS] Re: Open 7.1 items Thomas Lockhart
- [HACKERS] Re: Open 7.1 items Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Thomas Lockhart
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Hannu Krosing
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Hannu Krosing
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Vadim Mikheev
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] Open 7.1 items Manuel Cabido
